correct. do not select "upgrade all previous versions" when you go through the deployment wizard
On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 8:28 AM, Gerlak, Matthew <[email protected]> wrote: > Working perfectly means only uninstalls B from those that A is deployed to. > Sorry Just want to make sure. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of Todd Hemsell > Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2014 9:17 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [mssms] So basic Application question > > where A is the new app you set it to supersede B, and uninstall B before > installing A B must have an uninstall command line > > yes, if that is the only thing deployed it works perfectly > > On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 8:11 AM, Gerlak, Matthew <[email protected]> > wrote: >> OK thanks for the response Todd, >> So first off include me in the demo if you do it. >> Second. The option for Upgrade Previous Versions. Would this be on the >> deployment for Application A or Application B. and If I don’t have a >> deployment for Application B am I safe? >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Todd Hemsell >> Sent: Friday, May 02, 2014 9:00 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [mssms] So basic Application question >> >> Will it only uninstall office 2010 from the systems I add to my deployment >> collection during deployment. Or will it go out and remove it from all >> systems that have office 2010 installed. Knowing I only deploy to >> computers right now have not started users. >> >> Only to machines that get the 2013 deployment. >> UNLESS >> Once you make Application A supersede Application B a new option will show >> up on the deployment wizard (advertisement) It says "Upgrade previous >> versions" >> If you select that option then SCCM would in fact upgrade them all, >> but only if SCCM "Knows About" the deployment >> >> How does it "Know about it" >> >> Either office 2010 was deployed and installed by CM12, OR you do a >> simulated deployment of Office 2010 to all systems. Then SCCM will >> "Discover" the previous versions, and go ahead and upgrade them >> >> Feel free to ask more questions, this is very difficult to explain as there >> are a lot of variables and even things like how many dependencies and if the >> superseded app has a dependency will alter how and where the upgrades will >> take place. >> >> On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 4:06 PM, Gerlak, Matthew >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Ok let me clarify my question. As I was being a little sarcastic as I >>> really didn’t think it would but wanted to check. >>> So in my case I am doing an office 2013 pro plus upgrade from Office 2010 >>> Pro plus targeting machines not users. I did not install office 2010 with >>> this sccm install was mostly done with sccm 2007. >>> So I just figured out if I run the setup /config path/config.xml >>> /uninstall from my office 2010 install it removes office fully. >>> So what I want to do is Advertise office 2013 to a collection and add >>> machines to that collection to upgrade office. >>> My main question has to do with uninstall of office 2010 if I have office >>> 2010 setup as a new application model and I configure the uninstall option. >>> If I add office 2010 to office 2013 as office 2013 supersedes it and >>> uninstall is checked. >>> Will it only uninstall office 2010 from the systems I add to my deployment >>> collection during deployment. Or will it go out and remove it from all >>> systems that have office 2010 installed. Knowing I only deploy to >>> computers right now have not started users. >>> Also is this the best way to deploy office 2013. The office 2013 >>> upgrade doesn’t remove all of office 2010 like previous installs did >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [email protected] >>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kim Oppalfens >>> Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2014 3:34 PM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: RE: [mssms] So basic Application question >>> >>> Todd, I am trying to follow what you're saying here, but it's a bit hard. >>> I am guessing that in your mail below when you're saying simulated you mean >>> available? >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [email protected] >>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Todd Hemsell >>> Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2014 9:14 PM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: [mssms] So basic Application question >>> >>> So when a computer receives the policy for old app, and the the user >>> receives it for the new app, you don't have supersedence >>> >>> sure you do provided the superseded app is deployed simulate and not >>> mandatory OR if the detection rule on the older version says "this version >>> or greater" >>> In either case it will deploy the newer app, but if the older version is >>> mandatory, it will then remove the newer version and install the older >>> version (if the install supports it) It will go into a loop. Seen that a >>> few times. >>> >>> We strictly deploy applications to EITHER users OR computers, but never the >>> same app to both. >>> >>> If you deploy an app to a user and deploy the superseded version to the >>> system as simulated then the app will upgrade. >>> >>> All of the scenarios I am listing out I have verified by forcing M$ to >>> answer the question resulting in them going into the lab and reproducing >>> the behavior. Only after they reproduce it do I add it to our polies and >>> procedures. >>> >>> On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Kim Oppalfens <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> I'll try to explain what I know in the simplest way possible. >>>> (although that is hard) >>>> >>>> Supersedence in itself only kicks in when a resource receives a policy for >>>> both the old and the new app. >>>> (There's some exceptions here, that I'll leave out because I am >>>> trying the simple approach, but a user or computer needs to receive both.) >>>> So when a computer receives the policy for old app, and the the user >>>> receives it for the new app, you don't have supersedence. >>>> >>>> On the other hand, if you only receive the new app. Supersedence will >>>> uninstall the old app when detected. Even when not installed by cm. >>>> I think Todd is referring to the option of making a mandatory deployment >>>> to users that have the available app installed, which is yet another >>>> special case. >>>> >>>> Supersedence is actually a breeze, it gets complicated when you >>>> involve uninstalls :-) >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: [email protected] >>>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Marcum, John >>>> Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2014 5:51 PM >>>> To: '[email protected]' >>>> Subject: RE: [mssms] So basic Application question >>>> >>>> That's just plain silly. Is this classified as a bug???? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: [email protected] >>>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Todd Hemsell >>>> Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2014 10:48 AM >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Subject: Re: [mssms] So basic Application question >>>> >>>> no. >>>> >>>> Bear in mind my deployments are to users optional as was intended. >>>> None of this applies if it is to system. Or some of it might apply, but I >>>> do not do deployments to systems except our 60 core apps. >>>> The other 1,100 apps are user optional via the software center >>>> >>>> So for user deployments the policy comes down to the users. So for the >>>> case of superseded apps SCCM only sends the policy down to a USER + >>>> COMPUTER combination that it knows has the application. >>>> >>>> Interestingly enough it actually does send all supersedance rules to all >>>> users, but those are discarded by the client and never processed. >>>> There is a different flag on the ones where it knows the user + computer >>>> has the app. >>>> >>>> Yes, incredibly complicated. This is the result of a 4 month case with MS. >>>> It is difficult to even explain to people. >>>> >>>> On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 10:41 AM, Marcum, John <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> This part makes no sense to me. I'm not saying you are wrong but is this >>>>> "by design" because it sounds counter intuitive. " BUT only if CM12 >>>>> deployed it and "knows" it is installed." Shouldn't that be evaluated at >>>>> run time and not retrieved from some stored location? In other words if >>>>> the product code is present on the machine at run time it would be >>>>> removed. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: [email protected] >>>>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Todd Hemsell >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2014 10:31 AM >>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>> Subject: Re: [mssms] So basic Application question >>>>> >>>>> The question does not make sense to me. >>>>> >>>>> Options: >>>>> >>>>> Supersede an application: >>>>> This makes the older version no longer visible in the software center. >>>>> UNLESS you click the check box to make both version visible This >>>>> will make it to it removes the previous version before the new >>>>> version >>>>> >>>>> When you do that without a deployment you have just removed the >>>>> application from the software center, nothing else >>>>> >>>>> Then you do a deployment. You can either select to upgrade previous >>>>> versions or not. If you select not to then when someone gets the app it >>>>> will remove the previous version If you select to do it then you can set >>>>> a deadline. >>>>> With a deadline CM12 will actively upgrade previous versions, BUT only if >>>>> CM12 deployed it and "knows" it is installed. >>>>> >>>>> If you want to make sure it "knows about" all installed previous >>>>> version regardless of who or what installed it you need to do a >>>>> simulated deployment if the SUPERCEDED application to all SYSTEMS >>>>> (not >>>>> users) >>>>> >>>>> If you do that make sure of the following: >>>>> The superseded version cannot have any dependencies The deployed version >>>>> cannot have and CHAINED dependencies. >>>>> >>>>> If either of the above 2 are true, it will force install on all systems >>>>> regardless of whether the previous version is installed or not. >>>>> >>>>> A bit complicated, read it a few times before asking questions :-) >>>>> >>>>> The bugs are filed or being reproduced and filed today. >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 2:36 AM, Matt Wilkinson <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> I’m curious about this too. Do you delete the existing deployment >>>>>> for the old application or just leave it? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> From: Gerlak, Matthew [mailto:[email protected]] >>>>>> Sent: 29 April 2014 21:47 >>>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>>> Subject: RE: [mssms] So basic Application question >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> SO if I add a supersedence to my Office 2013 package to remove >>>>>> Office >>>>>> 2010 package and click the uninstall check box. I just want to >>>>>> make sure I still need a deployment for the upgraded to happen. I >>>>>> want to make sure I don’t upgrade everyone’s office overnight >>>>>> >>>>>> Like SMS or SCCM would do that. J >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> __________________________________________________________________ >>>>>> _ _ _ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email >>>>>> Security System on behalf of Leeds College of Building. >>>>>> For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com >>>>>> __________________________________________________________________ >>>>>> _ >>>>>> _ >>>>>> _ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> __________________________________________________________________ >>>>>> _ _ _ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email >>>>>> Security System on behalf of Leeds College of Building. >>>>>> For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com >>>>>> __________________________________________________________________ >>>>>> _ >>>>>> _ >>>>>> _ >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ________________________________ >>>>> >>>>> Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail is from a law firm and may be >>>>> protected by the attorney-client or work product privileges. If you have >>>>> received this message in error, please notify the sender by replying to >>>>> this e-mail and then delete it from your computer. >>>>> >>>>> ________________________________ >>>>> >>>>> Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail is from a law firm and may be >>>>> protected by the attorney-client or work product privileges. If you have >>>>> received this message in error, please notify the sender by replying to >>>>> this e-mail and then delete it from your computer. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ________________________________ >>>> >>>> Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail is from a law firm and may be >>>> protected by the attorney-client or work product privileges. If you have >>>> received this message in error, please notify the sender by replying to >>>> this e-mail and then delete it from your computer. >>>> >>>> ________________________________ >>>> >>>> Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail is from a law firm and may be >>>> protected by the attorney-client or work product privileges. If you have >>>> received this message in error, please notify the sender by replying to >>>> this e-mail and then delete it from your computer. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > >
