Skip to main content

sms: itmu cannot start updates installation due to install window violation

don't inadvertently make this happen. it's pretty silly...

inside the dsuw, you probably recall being presented with the option to force installations to comply to a window for advanced clients only. this setting is nearly useless if you're using dsuw the way it was intended (as in reoccurring schedules). it's also useless if you're forcing package download and execute instead of running from a remote distribution point.

the window that is specified uses the advertisement start time as its beginning marker. this means if you set an early start time to make sure your clients downloaded this month's patches and then a mandatory execution 3 days later, your advertisement would fail. why?

well, going on the default setting of 90 minutes, by the time the execution fires, you've already long lapsed that install window. you'll get an error in patchinstall.log that reads: 

cannot start updates installation due to install window violation.

 

if you've already setup dsuw this way, don't waste time going back through the wizard. instead, remove the /l:[time] switch from the program command line. something like this...

before:

PatchInstall.exe /n /z:ws /l:90 /s /q /c:5 /p /t:30 /m:"PatchAuthorize.xml"

 

after:

PatchInstall.exe /n /z:ws /s /q /c:5 /p /t:30 /m:"PatchAuthorize.xml"
marcusoh.blogspot.com
Labels:

Comments

  1. Anonymous7/10/07, 10:50 AM

    That worked, I was hung up on the /l:90 in which causing the invalid window error message. Your post solved the mystery rather quickly. Thanks!

    Chris

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

using preloadpkgonsite.exe to stage compressed copies to child site distribution points

UPDATE: john marcum sent me a kind email to let me know about a problem he ran into with preloadpkgonsite.exe in the new SCCM Toolkit V2 where under certain conditions, packages will not uncompress.  if you are using the v2 toolkit, PLEASE read this blog post before proceeding.   here’s a scenario that came up on the mssms@lists.myitforum.com mailing list. when confronted with a situation of large packages and wan links, it’s generally best to get the data to the other location without going over the wire. in this case, 75gb. :/ the “how” you get the files there is really not the most important thing to worry about. once they’re there and moved to the appropriate location, preloadpkgonsite.exe is required to install the compressed source files. once done, a status message goes back to the parent server which should stop the upstream server from copying the package source files over the wan to the child site. anyway, if it’s a relatively small amount of packages, you can
11 comments
more »

How to Identify Applications Using Your Domain Controller

Problem Everyone has been through it. We've all had to retire or replace a domain controller at some point in our checkered collective experiences. While AD provides very intelligent high availability, some applications are just plain dumb. They do not observe site awareness or participate in locating a domain controller. All they want is the name or IP of one domain controller which gets hardcoded in a configuration file somewhere, deeply embedded in some file folder or setting that you are never going to find. How do you look at a DC and decide which applications might be doing it? Packet trace? Logs? Shut it down and wait for screaming? It seems very tedious and nearly impossible. Potential Solution Obviously I wouldn't even bother posting this if I hadn't run across something interesting. :) I ran across something in draftcalled Domain Controller Isolation. Since it's in draft, I don't know that it's published yet. HOWEVER, the concept is based off
3 comments
more »

sccm: content hash fails to match

back in 2008, I wrote up a little thing about how distribution manager fails to send a package to a distribution point . even though a lot of what I wrote that for was the failure of packages to get delivered to child sites, the result was pretty much the same. when the client tries to run the advertisement with an old package, the result was a failure because of content mismatch. I went through an ordeal recently capturing these exact kinds of failures and corrected quite a number of problems with these packages. the resulting blog post is my effort to capture how these problems were resolved. if nothing else, it's a basic checklist of things you can use.   DETECTION status messages take a look at your status messages. this has to be the easiest way to determine where these problems exist. unfortunately, it requires that a client is already experiencing problems. there are client logs you can examine as well such as cas, but I wasn't even sure I was going to have enough m
3 comments
more »