M
Mark Stinson
After receiving nothing but commiseration on my problems with SUS (it's nice
to know that I'm not the only one who feels like he's beating his head up
againt a brick wall, but a fix would have been nicer), I uninstalled and
reinstalled. I'm waiting to see whether my SUS clients will start pulling
the updates like they are supposed to, but while I'm waiting:
If I have set SUS to pull only English language updates, why is SUS pulling
the .NET Framework SP2 in a dozen different languages?
835732 issue:
I've got a couple of hundred or so IBM 8305's and 8307's with Win2K. I've
done test installs of the lastest batch of patches on a few of them with
some odd/mixed results. The test machines have identical software and
printer configurations, all reside in the same OU and on the same subnet.
All machines were manually patched with the local Administrator account (see
previous comments about SUS).
Four of the machines (2 8305's and 2 8307's) took well over an hour to
install the patch, but had no other problems beyond that.
Four of the machines (3 8305's and 1 8307) behaved no differently than for
any other patch and have had no issues afterwards.
One 8307 installed normally, but got stuck with the 100% CPU usage problem
following reboot. I was able to log on again with the local administrator
account (didn't try a domain account), but it took somewhere between 15 and
20 minutes before the GUI reached the point where I could access the Task
Manager to see the performance statistics. I was able to reboot into Safe
Mode where it took close to 2 hours to uninstall the patch through
Add/Remove Programs. After the uninstall, the machine behaves normally.
None of the machines is configured for any sort of VPN, there is no IPSec
policy in place, I don't have Nortel anything installed on the machines,
there have been no hardware modifications; no old video drivers, all devices
show as functioning normally. Aside from hardware, there are no significant
differences between these machines. Theoretically, I should get the same
behavior from each machine, or at least from each machine type.
Something is fishy in the state of Redmond. Could someone give me a clue as
to what's going on?
Mark Stinson
El Paso, Texas
to know that I'm not the only one who feels like he's beating his head up
againt a brick wall, but a fix would have been nicer), I uninstalled and
reinstalled. I'm waiting to see whether my SUS clients will start pulling
the updates like they are supposed to, but while I'm waiting:
If I have set SUS to pull only English language updates, why is SUS pulling
the .NET Framework SP2 in a dozen different languages?
835732 issue:
I've got a couple of hundred or so IBM 8305's and 8307's with Win2K. I've
done test installs of the lastest batch of patches on a few of them with
some odd/mixed results. The test machines have identical software and
printer configurations, all reside in the same OU and on the same subnet.
All machines were manually patched with the local Administrator account (see
previous comments about SUS).
Four of the machines (2 8305's and 2 8307's) took well over an hour to
install the patch, but had no other problems beyond that.
Four of the machines (3 8305's and 1 8307) behaved no differently than for
any other patch and have had no issues afterwards.
One 8307 installed normally, but got stuck with the 100% CPU usage problem
following reboot. I was able to log on again with the local administrator
account (didn't try a domain account), but it took somewhere between 15 and
20 minutes before the GUI reached the point where I could access the Task
Manager to see the performance statistics. I was able to reboot into Safe
Mode where it took close to 2 hours to uninstall the patch through
Add/Remove Programs. After the uninstall, the machine behaves normally.
None of the machines is configured for any sort of VPN, there is no IPSec
policy in place, I don't have Nortel anything installed on the machines,
there have been no hardware modifications; no old video drivers, all devices
show as functioning normally. Aside from hardware, there are no significant
differences between these machines. Theoretically, I should get the same
behavior from each machine, or at least from each machine type.
Something is fishy in the state of Redmond. Could someone give me a clue as
to what's going on?
Mark Stinson
El Paso, Texas