Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion GroupsWindows Server 2003Windows 2000Windows NTSmall Business ServerVirtual ServerExchange ServerIISHost Integration ServerISA ServerSMSWSUSMOMWindows Media ServerSecurityCertification
Related Topics
SQL ServerMS WindowsMS OfficePC HardwareMore Topics ...

Windows Server Forum / Windows 2000 / Update / January 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

updates download but do not install via SUS

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Andrew Story - 23 Jan 2006 13:26 GMT
Hi,  apologies for crossposting but need this to get to as many people who
may be able to offer help as possible.

We have had SUS configured and running for over a year now, set to download
and install updates after appoval at 4am, or 5 mins after a machine has been
logged on.  We have a site office with a child SUS server and around 60
machines, the updates download, but do not install automatically.  Instead
it advises that the updates have been downloaded and asks the user to
install them.

This morning when we turned on our machines, we got the automatic update
icon.
Updates are ready to download. After 5 minutes, the updates were downloaded
and we got the message that updates are ready to install. 2 Hours later, a
machine was rebooted, but we have still the message that the updates are
ready to install.

Can anuyone shed any light on this?

All users on this site are local admins on the machine, does this make a
difference?

Any help much appreciated.
Dan Pinkham - 25 Jan 2006 14:55 GMT
I recognize this behaviour from sus/wsus in a test environment, and I do
think it is to do with a user issue and what method you pick for installing
the updates i.e notify for install, schedule etc.

I think with local admins, the assumption is that with this more powerful
user, they get an option to install now or later etc. If scheduled install
for domain users you may find a difference
> Hi,  apologies for crossposting but need this to get to as many people who
> may be able to offer help as possible.
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
>
> Any help much appreciated.
Andrew Story - 26 Jan 2006 13:38 GMT
A reply from an MVP (Lawrence Garvin) in a different group, may help other
in a similar situation...

To force the installation on a client in which a user has admin rights, you
can:

(a) Instruct the local admin to leave the Windows Update Agent alone, and
the machine powered on during the scheduled installation time, at which time
the system will install the update(s) in a completely unattended fashion.

(b) Assign a deadline to an update for a time far in the future. This will
prevent the local admin from being able to unselect the update for
installation, but the admin can still preemptively initiate the installation
interactively, if so desired.

(c) Enable the User policy "Remove all access to Windows Update features",
which will block all access to the WUA User Interface, Windows Update, and
Microsoft Update. Not recommended, as this will also prevent the
installation of Optional Updates that are only available via WU/MU.

> I recognize this behaviour from sus/wsus in a test environment, and I do
> think it is to do with a user issue and what method you pick for installing
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
> >
> > Any help much appreciated.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.