It has only taken BMC support six weeks to answer this one (further evidence that they cannot document their own software worth a flip), and it turns out that patch 005 to the DSL was never intended to be used on the DSL installed with ITSM, only the "standalone" version (which I had never seen mentioned or documented before). So the "workaround" they gave me a month ago, where you hack the records in Share:Application_Properties to allow the installer to run, should never have been offered or performed; no wonder it left the DSL console completely unusable on my dev server. The same is true of patch 006 to DSL, except that it gives you a much more specific and intelligent error message when you try to run it.
So today, DSL installed with ITSM has a maximum patch level of 1516, and only the _data_ should be at patch 005 (the data version in patch 005 is 110.7.0.1). Beware of BMC employees bearing "workarounds" - chances are they are really just clueless, and grasping at straws (not true for all; there are a few I know I can trust). Footnote: That is why I am holding out for a formal technical bulletin or approved knowledge base article on their proposed workaround for SLM notifications. They want me to hack the HPD:Help Desk form to lookup and store the long group name from the Groups form (for my group that looks like this: UNT CITC Academic Computing and User Services->CITC ACS-US Call Tracking->Call Tracking Administration) that corresponds to the Assigned Group - Support Group Name and ID (SGP00000000000#) because their integration between SLM 7.1 and Incident Management cannot search assigned support groups in CTM:Support Group for members, and so no escalations are being sent at all to support group members or managers (the entire purpose of the SLM application, from my point of view). If that is what they have to do to get SLM to work with IM, it _should_ have been in the integration, and if it wasn't, it _should_ have been documented and already be in a patch, but none of that has been done. I am having to force them to document it, by refusing to let them just toss me a barely coherent workaround, file a defect, and blithely close the issue. Shoddy, and unprofessional. Christopher Strauss, Ph.D. Call Tracking Administration Manager University of North Texas Computing & IT Center http://itsm.unt.edu/ > -----Original Message----- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of strauss > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 8:44 PM > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Definitive Software Library > > I am obviously missing something here. > > DSL 1.0.00 is installed with ITSM 7.0.02, specifically Change > Management I believe. It's console appears on my Home Page > as an admin. > The Patch 1516 installer runs fine against it. On production > I have not loaded updated data, or imported any data yet > since we had been debating whether or not to do so. Now I > want to load data, but need to patch it first. Development > is an older system, upgraded to ARS 7.1.00.01 and CMDB > 2.1.00, on which DSL data has been loaded and updated several times. > > In Share:Application_Properties it shows version 1.0.00 Patch > 1516 on both servers. > > The documentation for DLS 7.0 Patch 005 and DSL 7.1.01 > mirrors this, that it should have installed with the ITSM 7.0 > installation of Change Management. It says to apply Patch > 005 to the DSL. > > When I run Patch 005 for DSL on my development or production (ARS > 7.1.00.001 / CMDB 2.1.00.001 / ITSM 7.0.02.007) servers, it > fails after reporting that the three ITSM apps are installed > (IM, PM, CM, all > 7.0.03.007) with the error: > > Pre-requisites not met > BMC Remedy Definitive Software Library Version 7.00.00 or > higher is required. > > At what point in loading the latest version of every piece of > BMC code I could scavenge off support web did I NOT get it to > the point where it > thinks it has DSL 7.0.x?????? Or is this one of those > installers than > only works against an older code base, which means that I > would have had to install it back in December before ITSM > Patch 006 or CMDB 2.1.00.001 (January)?? Anyone have any > experience with this one?? > > Christopher Strauss, Ph.D. > Call Tracking Administration Manager > University of North Texas Computing & IT Center http://itsm.unt.edu/ > > ______________________________________________________________ > _________________ > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org > Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" > _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
