RM CC3 Win XP SP3 Update

[beast_gts]

Hi

 

I'm looking into applying the RM CC3 Win XP SP3 Update ASAP so we can move ahead with the SIMS Spring 2011 update.

 

Am I right in thinking you first run the update on the servers (I can restore from tape if it breaks the servers) and then I tell it which machines want SP3 rather than it applying it automatically out to everything? One or two dead machines are easier to fix than 300

 

Thanks in advance,

[Gatt]

Haven't RM got a CC3 package for SP3?

If so then surely you just import the package into RMMC then assign it to the PCs?

 

**I've had limited exposure to CC4 and none to CC3 so I'm guessing here...**

[synaesthesia]

Yeah its a straight package. The server install doesnt do anything server side except copy over 3 packages and update the package list.

Then you just allocate it to the stations you want. RM suggest(ed) that you made another OU/location for SP3 machines only and applied it to that location, although thats rather daft IMO. If there's a few machines you know will cause trouble, move them elsewhere in management console and apply SP3 to everything else. That's the XP SP3 update, the Windows Installer update and IE 7 for SP3 iirc.

 

Nothing too much to it - if you have laptops to do, don't forget they MUST be on the mains for the update to apply and be real careful with wireless drivers.

[bodminman]

We used NLite to slipstream SP3 into the build area and then rebuilt the stations. At least then the stations are built from the off with SP3 instead of waiting for the package to install.

[sparkeh]

The RM recommended way is to apply the SP3 update and allocate SP3 package to stations.

I must say that I (and others) have found that can be quite flakey so if you can have a dig around the RM KB and RM Communities to find any gotchas before you start (eg I found an issue during field trial where the machines failed to build as after the SP3 package was applied the NIC timed out before contacting the build server, there is an RM TEC about this).

 

However I still find this approach daft. Why build a machine to SP2 only to then apply SP3?

So if you are confident I believe it much better to slipstream SP3 into the build area so machines build straight to SP3.

Plenty of info on Communities on the process for this.

[bodminman]

The RM recommended way is to apply the SP3 update and allocate SP3 package to stations.

I must say that I (and others) have found that can be quite flakey so if you can have a dig around the RM KB and RM Communities to find any gotchas before you start (eg I found an issue during field trial where the machines failed to build as after the SP3 package was applied the NIC timed out before contacting the build server, there is an RM TEC about this).

 

However I still find this approach daft. Why build a machine to SP2 only to then apply SP3?

So if you are confident I believe it much better to slipstream SP3 into the build area so machines build straight to SP3.

Plenty of info on Communities on the process for this.

 

RM really made a hash of this I think. They should have redone the build area on a fairly regular basis and help the punters out more with the update packages.

[sparkeh]

RM really made a hash of this I think. They should have redone the build area on a fairly regular basis and help the punters out more with the update packages.

 

Agreed, and don't think that this wasn't fed back during the field trial.

Just another in a long line of things that show RM's lack of interest in CC3, note how CC4 gets new build areas

[bodminman]

Agreed, and don't think that this wasn't fed back during the field trial.

Just another in a long line of things that show RM's lack of interest in CC3, note how CC4 gets new build areas

 

I firmly believe RM could have kept CC3 going and nurtured it just for primary schools. Looking at CC4 I think it's WAY overkill for a primary but CC3 would still be ideal.

 

Just my opinion anyway.

[PiqueABoo]

They should have redone the build area on a fairly regular basis

 

In D-I-Y land my XP source is SP3 with one of this month's post-SP3 sec-fix update packages applied to it every so often with nlite, but I also use WSUS. Thinking about this for WSUS-less CC3 hurts my head e.g. a machine built this month doesn't need to install a 100 "tools" (KB) packages you have allocated.

 

I firmly believe RM could have kept CC3 going and nurtured it just for primary schools. Looking at CC4 I think it's WAY overkill for a primary

 

Primary? I think CC4 is way overkill, period. That's a lot of ambitious, complex architecture/code with much arguably being 'real-time' (=hard =bad) that still has bits missing and still hasn't quite settled down into solid reliability (if you include pre-release development how old is it now?). Ignoring client OS support, what's the benefit? Positively: Background s/w installs, some bells and whistles you can get in a dozen other ways. Negatively: Not being able to have some packages install at start-up and a very significant increase in resources required to manage the system and run all that code on clients.

 

Less is more.

[beast_gts]

Is there any real difference between using the CC3 SP3 package (DWN1544594) and doing a vanilla WinXP SP3 install on the workstations and Smart Client'ing them into RM?

[synaesthesia]

No. Just have an extra package to allocate to smartcliented SP3 machines but that's it, no difference in performance. The latter is almost certainly quicker though.,

[bodminman]

No. Just have an extra package to allocate to smartcliented SP3 machines but that's it, no difference in performance. The latter is almost certainly quicker though.,

 

The latter is way quicker indeed as part of the RM PC build sequence is partitioning and creating a backup etc. If you're not fussed then keeping an upto date XP Pro mage and using something WDS and Smartclienting the machine will save you an hour (probably nearer to 1.5 hours) in build time alone. Unless you get you're packages cleaned up though you'll end up with a lot of 'Install Failed' tags for the machine.

[Sylv3r]

We followed the unoffical guide of changing the build to XP3 and didn't go down the RM CC3 package route - haven't had a single problem and will cut our build times down due to not having to install SP2 updates or the large SP3 package.

[Max_Power]

Just wondered why do you need to install XP SP3 for the Spring release? We dont have SP3 yet due to various reasons and spring release is working fine?

[synaesthesia]

The official line is the requirement of .NET Framework 4.0 which is apparently SP3 only (according to MS). However I've also witnessed that working absolutely fine on SP2 machines. On top of which, I'm not even sure of the requirement of the Net Framework 4 until Summer release now.

Regardless, if you haven't got SP3 on the system already it's time to take a good hard long look at your network.

[bodminman]

. . . . . if you haven't got SP3 on the system already it's time to take a good hard long look at your network.

 

Very true!