jjohnsoncantell

I didn't even realise it was part of windows, it worked a treat thanks.

I dont believe ive used that before, please could you point me in the direction of where I can find it. Im assuming it would have usage instructions? Thanks

Greetings, Is there any easy way to remove a user from all security permissions on nested folders? I have users in folder permissions who were manually added as opposed to part of a group and this has been done on multiple folders. I would like to remove that user without affecting any other permissions or inheritance. Is this possible? Thanks James

Is there anyone who may be able to help with this? I dont know where these sids have come from or if they are causing any sort of problem. Thanks James

Greetings, Im pretty certain I know the answer to this already but just wanted to make certain. All updates deployed through wsus have specified os that they are meant for (exception of office/media player updates natch). If I were to decline any vista updates, now that I no longer have any vista clients, it should not affect any Win7 clients should it? Bearing in mind that its pretty much the same os. I know its a daft question but I wanted to make sure before I declined a shed load of updates. Thanks.

Its not great, it seems to work different ways for different people. Last week i lost all access to the fileserver for no reason, took hours to get it back working again. Now i have the home drive and the resources drive mapped to the dock. for now its the long winded way for me. If I do have a breakthrough Ill be sure to post it.

This is true, i probably am overthinking it. I just suppose in the past i was pretty confident they could only do what we allowed them to.

Just curious but is anyone concerned that using the solus deployment console, your entire network can be browsed with access to the c$ share on any client? Lots of schools allow outside access to their SIMS servers for the purpose of updating/troubleshooting by their local capita support. Isnt this a bit of a security risk?

I tried this and it seemed to work for me too, thanks Now I need to work out a way of making it appear in any save dialogs as that doesnt happen either.

im glad i could help Sounds like one of those random events where different software packages combine to create a problem. If it was a random update that didnt have too much significance i wouldnt have worried too much about removing it. However where its related to windows installer, it got me wondering if it was safe not having that update or what else would have been affected if id left it installed. All of the affected clients work perfectly now that wsus has forced a removal of the update. I still may contact sophos incase they are aware and have a fix.

Oops, forgot to say what version i was using. Im using mavericks. Am i right in saying ghostcasting uses multicast because that works no problem

Greetings, I am trying to use multicast to deploy an image via deploystudio. Whenever i start the deployment it creates the system partition fine but as soon as the main image comes down i get nothing but "XDBGfailed request for ..." errors filling up the screen and it fails. I get this whether im using my network or an unmanaged switch. Ive turned down the multicast speed but no joy. Anyone else experienced this before? James

Hi All, A number of updates came out this patch tuesday which I installed for testing on a few sets of laptops. I immediately started getting errors when trying to update sophos, returning "error 997.overlapped I/O operation in progress" during installation. Because this wasnt a standard error that I would recognise I initially blamed sophos, there was not a lot of information about this error on the net but what on a few occasions windows installer was mentioned as a possible culprit. It turns out this was true, since I installed a batch of updates at the same time it took a little testing and back tracking to work out that this was caused by KB2918614 which is a security update for windows installer MS14-049: Description of the security update for Windows Installer Service: August 12, 2014 . Once this was removed it the updates worked without fault on every single client which exhibited the problem. Thankfully KB2918614 is removable on WSUS and for the immediate future I wont be re-installing it. Could anyone suggest what my next step would be to find out how to get this patch to work without causing problems with other software? Thanks James

I would like it to show up in the main finder window or on the desktop. Im pretty sure that it has connected but its just not displaying it

Greetings, Another problem ive come across is, even though the home drive is mapped and exists, finder refuses to show it in its main window. I can get to pop up in finder via Command-Shift-H so I know its there but having a link in the main finder page just doesnt happen. Ive had suggestions of changing the finder preferences but that doesnt really work either. I need it to be in the list of links in the main finder page without having to manually add it since id have to this for 800+ users if that were the case. There isnt a great deal of information on the net when it relates to network users. Any suggestions? Thanks James

Brill, thanks for your help guys.

excellent, thanks for your help everyone.

Greetings, I have a user gpo that i want to deploy based on the computer the user logs on to. I have separate ou's containing each of my IT rooms however in one of these rooms im testing a different version of IE and want different settings to apply to uusers logging onto said machines. If i deploy my user gpo for the new version of IE into the ou containing said computers, will they still be picked up by the user during logon? Normally i would deploy the gpo into the users ou however i dont want anyone else to be affected by the changes save for the users logging onto these different clients. Thanks James

They couldnt really explain it, rather frustrating. Problem is i couldnt reproduce the issue, i had it happen loads of times last week too. Back to the drawing board

yeah that was my next port of call, just checking really to see if anyone else has experienced this sort of behavior before i sit waiting for a phone call lol

I just ran a continuous ping with the server running and no packet loss reported after 20 mins.

ive run wireshark today and the only server i can see responding to dhcp requests is my main dhcp server. I did however notice something odd. I started a ping log to a client which reported a duplicate address again this morning (log attached), since id switched it off to make sure it wasnt responding to the ping request i was getting the usual "destination host unreachable" by the ip address of my computer. However. every so often, the ping request timed out and my meru controller responded with "destination host unreachable" instead before it went back to normal. If im correct this should not be happening. Pinging 192.168.0.14 with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Request timed out. Reply from 192.168.0.10: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Request timed out. Reply from 192.168.0.10: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.0.10: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.3.79: Destination host unreachable.

Thats what i was starting to think. I dont want the students to install apps so is my easiest option to assign the apps to say an admin user, then login with that user and install manually?

its vpp apps im trying to use. I downloaded garageband through the vpp, added my macbook in the devices but dont have the option to push it to it.

there arent any odd settings on the switches.. Gonna try wireshark and see what happens. Thanks guys