CU5 was just released :) https://support2.microsoft.com/kb/3054451/en-us?sd=rss&spid=1060
-Stephen > On May 6, 2015, at 11:57 AM, Barnes,Chris <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I would make sure to update the clients with the CU quickly after the Primary > is updated. We ran into an issue with the primary at R2 CU4 and the clients > at R2 no CU, where the clients would generate 25-30MB of global catalog and > LDAP traffic if they happened to have other patches install and cause a > reboot. > > We held back on the CU4 client side patch until after our scheduled monthly > patches, and the resulting traffic took down our entire WAN for almost a day. > > > Chris Barnes > Senior Technical Specialist > Penske Automotive Group > (248) 648-2528 Direct > (248) 767-4415 Mobile > > > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of John Aubrey > Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2015 10:00 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [mssms] 2012 R2 CU4 update > > Same here, System Center updates are pretty quickly deployed. If the user > doesn’t notice, we tend to do those during the day and quickly. > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of ccollins9 > Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2015 10:46 AM > To: mssms > Subject: Re: [mssms] 2012 R2 CU4 update > > I'm a little more lenient with SCCM (and most other System Center products) > due to the fact that if it goes down for a little while while I restore from > Veeam backup, users generally wouldn't notice or care. Now Exchange CUs----I > usually let the "IT Marines" out there storm the beach first and soak up all > the enemy fire before I deploy my troops. > > On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Juelich, Adam <[email protected]> > wrote: > Hey Satch, > > Generally it seems that the consensus is to do the CU's as soon as possible > for everything. That's what I've followed and was relayed to me from some of > the MVPs. > > > ----------------------------------------------- > > Adam Juelich > > Pulaski Community School District > > Client Management Specialist > > 920-822-6075 > > > On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Al Corsi <[email protected]> wrote: > Good thread, thanks for the info... > > On a side but related note, and for the CUs, the download notice indicates > "this hotfix has not undergone full testing.". At what point are you > comfortable with deploying to your production sites? > > We're just standing up a new R2 site, and figure go straight to the latest! > Regards, Al > > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 03:08 PM, ccollins9 wrote: > > @Jeff Spengler, > > These links to MS's website explain it more. I am going to look into using > the SCUP method instead of messing with and figuring out x86 vs. x64, etc. > > https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/907423 > http://blogs.technet.com/b/jamess_configmgr_blog/archive/2012/02/11/installation-of-configmgr-client-hotfixes-during-client-installation.aspx > > > > Also, I forgot to mention, using the package MS gives you produces this in > the execmgr.log, which in turn treats the install as a failure because the > upgrade causes ccmexec.exe to restart. So, yeah, probably the least best way > of deployment IMO. With an application, it would use the deployment criteria > to check for actual installation afterwards and report correctly. > > Running "C:\Windows\ccmcache\2d\ccmsetup.exe" /noservice SMSSITECODE=AUTO > with 32bitLauncher execmgr 4/30/2015 2:57:47 PM 49104 (0xBFD0) > Service stopped while program Configuration Manager agent silent upgrade is > running execmgr 4/30/2015 3:04:16 PM 58384 (0xE410) > OpenProcess failed for process 45504, error 80070057 execmgr 4/30/2015 > 3:04:16 PM 58384 (0xE410) > Can not continue monitoring the program after service restart because the > process exited. Assume failed execmgr 4/30/2015 3:04:16 PM 58384 (0xE410) > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 2:18 PM, ccollins9 <[email protected]> wrote: > Remember, I am not only deploying CU4, but I am also deploying the upgrade > for the R2 client at the same time. Slipstreaming an update into the initial > install of an application is usually preferable to most people, otherwise we > as admins wouldn't be bending over backwards to often find ways of doing it > for various MS products. Their also wouldn't be blog after blog on technet > explaining how to do it. > > I get that MS provides a CU4 package, but I really don't understand why > everyone is being so dogmatic about using it when we all know that > applications are better in most every way. Just because MS provides us the > bare minimum to update the clients (packages), it doesn't mean we can't that > and improve it. Packages are archaic and require babysitting and many times > redeployment or recurring deployment. I stopped using them years ago. > > I do like the SCUP idea, I am going to look into that as well because using > Software Updates would afford the same level of automation. > > > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Azeem Patel <[email protected]> wrote: > As metioned earlier CU4 update on server creates a deployment package. > > If you want to do in controlled manner, few systems at time. THEN > > Create collection for CU4 update and deploy CU4 package on the collection. > moving systems set by set for installation. > > > > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 10:05 PM, ccollins9 <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Justin! > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Justin Chalfant > <[email protected]> wrote: > Guide here: > http://blogs.technet.com/b/jchalfant/archive/2013/06/23/installing-configuration-manager-sp1-cumulative-update-2-patches-using-scup.aspx > > Thanks, > > Justin Chalfant > Premier Field Engineer – Configuration Manager > Public Sector > Microsoft Services > > Tel : (303) 846-2701 > Email: [email protected] > > If you have any feedback about my work, please let either myself or my > manager Rusty Gray know at [email protected] > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of Jason Sandys > Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2015 10:28 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [mssms] 2012 R2 CU4 update > > Because it’s a patch and not an application. Honestly, the best option for > this is SCUP and Software Updates because that’s designed for patches. > > J > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of ccollins9 > Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2015 8:34 AM > To: mssms > Subject: Re: [mssms] 2012 R2 CU4 update > > Yeah, I know it creates those packages. I don't like using packages when I > can avoid it. I'd be curious to know why MS has the CU4 installer create > packages instead of applications, but that's now really germane to this > discussion. > > I got it figured out---seemed to be just an issue with that one test machine. > I ended up rolling the patch into the install/upgrade with (ccmsetup.exe > PATCH=xxxx) and having the application's detection criteria check for both > the R2 productID and the 5.0.7958.1501 (CU4) patch level. > > http://blogs.technet.com/b/jamess_configmgr_blog/archive/2012/02/11/installation-of-configmgr-client-hotfixes-during-client-installation.aspx > > It's working well so far on other machines and I get the added benefit that > if it fails it will retry because it's an application. > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 3:11 AM, Mawdsley R. <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, providing you selected the option when you upgraded the server, it would > have automatically created client (and server) update packages for you > located under: Software Library>Application > Management>Packages>Configuration Manager Updates. > > Just deploy these (remember to distribute), it’s what they are there for J. > > > > You could even make device collections with a query to automatically show you > what machines have or have not been upgraded. > > Rich > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of ccollins9 > Sent: 29 April 2015 23:33 > To: mssms > Subject: [mssms] 2012 R2 CU4 update > > This has been kicking my butt all day. Our system was SCCM 2012 SP1. I > upgraded the site server to 2012 R2 CU4. I now need to update the client > systems > > I know I can do automatic upgrade, but I also want to create an application > for the new client to target machines during a maintenance window before > turning on automatic updating. > > I created an application basically just using the same install command that > the built-in update package uses after installing R2. I have the detection > criteria set to look for {8864FB91-94EE-4F16-A144-0D82A232049D}. > > Anyway, it's doing something I've NEVER seen in all my years working with > SCCM 2012. > > The application starts and I'm viewing the AppEnforce.log: > > "Waiting for process 6920 to finish. Timeout = 15 minutes" > > And there it sits, FOREVER. Long past the 15 minute timeout. ccmsetup.exe is > tied to process 6920 in this case. It starts, uninstalls ccmexec.exe, > reinstalls it, then ccmsetup.exe closes, meaning process 6920 closes from the > list of running processes. Yet there it sits. So the client is successful, > but it never seems to "finish" properly. My initial thought is that it is > getting messed up because it's the client and it's reinstalling, so who knows > how that will make the logs look to me. I knocked down the timeout down to 15 > minutes to at least see if it terminates itself with an error, but no, it > just sits. > > How are others deploying UPGRADES to SCCM 2012 R2 clients? And for that > matter, how are folks handling the subsequent client update to CU4? > > Are y'all just using the built-in packages and hoping they work? I wanted to > try it as an application because: > > A. it would check for failure and try again until it was successful > B. I created an app for the R2 upgrade and another one for the CU4 patch, > then made the CU4 patch application depend on the R2 Upgrade application > > Am I just making this all harder on myself? > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > -Regards > Azeem > [email protected] > +91-9892411957 > Linkedin Profile > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Penske Automotive Group and its affiliates will never sell or rent your email > address in violation of applicable law. This email and any files transmitted > with it are confidential and intended solely for use of the individual or > entity to whom they are addressed. Please delete all copies if you are not > the intended recipient. >
