Hmm do we work for the same company?
Regards,
Chris Orovet
From: James Rankin [mailto:kz2...@googlemail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 3:59 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Change control (was RE: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC)
I've worked for a number
: Change control (was RE: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC)
I've worked for a number of outsourcing companies and the change control is
always very tight. It's the only way they can do it, but I admit it is
completely inflexible for the client - particularly those that retain IT
staff who now have
Ok, I am going off in a completely different direction. I did not see the part
where you talked to others about PSEXEC so I don't know why you are going in
that direction.
Why not just script it to the machines via GPO. If it is a machine policy the
install/update will run with elevated privs
+1
I just use psexec for the random one-off tasks.
Sam
From: Kennedy, Jim [mailto:kennedy...@elyriaschools.org]
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 6:57 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC
Ok, I am going off
You don't want logging? Did you mean that? I'd suggest it's critical.
I'd say that trying roll your own methods for patch management on 2800
desktops is going to be pretty tough to manage, unless you have a VERY
locked down and cookie-cutter infrastructure.
-sc
From: tony patton
We used to use a batch script using psexec to patch 500 Windows NT Server
systems because management wouldn't pay for anything. We had to do the OS,
Internet Explorer (all versions), Adobe, Office, all the other stuff. We
started off using a text file full of data being parsed for the relevant
/2009 13:35
Subject:
RE: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC
+1
I just use psexec for the random one-off tasks.
Sam
From: Kennedy, Jim [mailto:kennedy...@elyriaschools.org]
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 6:57 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC
Ok, I am
Date: 31/08/2009 13:35 Subject: RE:
[On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC
--
+1
I just use psexec for the random one-off tasks.
Sam
--
*From:* Kennedy, Jim
[mailto:kennedy...@elyriaschools.orgkennedy...@elyriaschools.org
] *
Sent
I agree on the it becomes a full time job part.
However, he specifically mention non-MS apps... and WSUS won't do that.
-sc
From: James Rankin [mailto:kz2...@googlemail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 9:49 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC
Admin Issues
Subject: RE: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC
The reasoning for not using GPO's is the amount of things that are
already running on machine startup, no control over this.
Machine shutdown GPO is an option.
-sc, the reason I mentioned logging, or lack thereof, is that we're
-software.com
Date:
31/08/2009 15:57
Subject:
RE: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC
Gotcha. And agreed? it would be a full time.. and still not give you the
features a true patch management system should.
-sc
(and the dash isn?t part of my initials?. ;-)
From: tony patton [mailto:tony.pat
jonathan.l...@gmail.com
To:
NT System Admin Issues ntsysadmin@lyris.sunbelt-software.com
Date:
31/08/2009 15:30
Subject:
Re: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC
Out of curiosity, what exactly is running at machine startup (and why
can't you control it)? Or are you confusing startup with logon? Startup
[mailto:kz2...@googlemail.com]
*Sent:* Monday, August 31, 2009 9:49 AM
*To:* NT System Admin Issues
*Subject:* Re: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC
We used to use a batch script using psexec to patch 500 Windows NT Server
systems because management wouldn't pay for anything. We had to do the OS
Subject: Re: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC
--
Out of curiosity, what exactly is running at machine startup (and why can't
you control it)? Or are you confusing startup with logon? Startup and
logon are two distinct events, despite their close timing.
On Mon
ntsysadmin@lyris.sunbelt-software.com
Date:
31/08/2009 16:37
Subject:
Re: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC
Okay I will bite on this, why no WSUS? I am directing this to the OP
now. It is relativity free, it does require a license for a machine but
it will run on a desktop (not very well
Rankin [mailto:kz2...@googlemail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 9:49 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC
We used to use a batch script using psexec to patch 500 Windows NT
Server systems because management wouldn't pay for anything. We had to
do the OS
8078
Direct Dial 049 435 2878
email: tony.pat...@quinn-insurance.com
From: Jon Harris jk.har...@gmail.com To: NT System Admin Issues
ntsysadmin@lyris.sunbelt-software.com
Date: 31/08/2009 16:37
Subject: Re: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC
--
Okay I
of logging, reporting, error
handling, etc…
It’s a significant challenge.
-sc
*From:* James Rankin [mailto:kz2...@googlemail.com]
*Sent:* Monday, August 31, 2009 11:32 AM
*To:* NT System Admin Issues
*Subject:* Re: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC
Ah yes. Read threads fully before
!!) . A company not thinking sensibly is a company I will not work for.
Dave
From: tony patton [mailto:tony.pat...@quinn-insurance.com]
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 8:08 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC
What I mean by no control is two-fold:
1. I don't have any say
patton [mailto:tony.pat...@quinn-insurance.com]
*Sent:* Monday, August 31, 2009 8:08 AM
*To:* NT System Admin Issues
*Subject:* Re: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC
What I mean by no control is two-fold:
1. I don't have any say over most of the policies, only a subset;
2. We have to go
]
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 12:09 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC
The problem is all the companies with these stringent change control processes
have been, to speak proverbially, bitten squarely in the ass by a lack of
change control. I work
31, 2009 12:09 PM
*To:* NT System Admin Issues
*Subject:* Re: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC
The problem is all the companies with these stringent change control
processes have been, to speak proverbially, bitten squarely in the ass by a
lack of change control. I work for the polar
would have been
prevented, here’s how….”
Dave
*From:* James Rankin [mailto:kz2...@googlemail.com]
*Sent:* Monday, August 31, 2009 12:09 PM
*To:* NT System Admin Issues
*Subject:* Re: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC
The problem is all the companies with these stringent change control
I have patched tens of thousands of boxes with psexec. My current patching
script I use is a VBScript which I launch from psexec. Works great. Logging is
built-in to the scripts...
Thanks,
Brian Desmond
br...@briandesmond.com
c - 312.731.3132
Active Directory, 4th Ed -
24 matches
Mail list logo
