Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Andrew Jimenez

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9
31
You are welcome. It is unfortunate, it bites us too from time to time.. Sorry I don't have better news for you :(


32
Ahh, In SCUP, did you happen to open the Jabber update, and click the browse button, then browse to your download?
It seems the rules we had were overwritten, and browsing to the MSI file in the edit wizard will do that...

33
Here are the applicability rules for Jabber from our catalog, they are the same with the latest release that is not relying on the local content path as well:
Code: [Select]
      <sdp:IsInstallable>
        <lar:And>
          <msiar:MsiApplicationInstallable />
          <lar:Or>
            <lar:And>
              <bar:FileExists Path="Cisco Systems\Cisco Jabber\CiscoJabber.exe" Csidl="42" />
              <bar:FileVersion Comparison="LessThan" Path="Cisco Systems\Cisco Jabber\CiscoJabber.exe" Version="12.9.5.55511" Csidl="42" />
            </lar:And>
            <lar:And>
              <bar:FileExists Path="Cisco Systems\Cisco Jabber\CiscoJabber.exe" Csidl="38" />
              <bar:FileVersion Comparison="LessThan" Path="Cisco Systems\Cisco Jabber\CiscoJabber.exe" Version="12.9.5.55511" Csidl="38" />
            </lar:And>
          </lar:Or>
        </lar:And>
      </sdp:IsInstallable>
      <sdp:Metadata>
        <msiar:MsiApplicationMetadata>
          <msiar:ProductCode>{A17CAD61-815C-42AA-B6E7-76AFEF2C9311}</msiar:ProductCode>
        </msiar:MsiApplicationMetadata>
      </sdp:Metadata>

This will install if it finds the product code {A17CAD61-815C-42AA-B6E7-76AFEF2C9311} or the file C:\Program Files [(x86)]\Cisco Systems\Cisco Jabber\CiscoJabber.exe with a version of less than 12.9.5.55511

34
In SCUP you can click the "View XML" to see the rule. I'll see if I can pull the old catalog as well and check it out.

35
Hi there, can you please run through this kb and let me know what you see for the applicability for that update: https://patchmypc.com/how-to-view-applicability-rules-and-troubleshoot-detection-states-for-third-party-updates

36
Hi Dominik,

Can you open a support case here: https://patchmypc.com/technical-support

And include the logs from some failed client. The logs we need are referenced here: https://patchmypc.com/collecting-log-files-for-patch-my-pc-support#update-troubleshooting-client-logs

Also please reference this thread.

37
Thanks for letting us know. We've noted this and will see what we can do in terms of upgrading.

38
Hi Dominik,

In our testing we did not run into any issues with this application specifically. We have seen this problem before where another installation is still running and blocking the install, I am going to guess that is what occurred in this case. Have your installation numbers improved since you posted this?

39
No worries, the fixed rules went out yesterday for 3.8.8. Thanks for bringing this to our attention!

40
Are you looking at them in SCUP? They aren't actually empty, SCUP just can't process the rule type we use. if you click on the "View XML" you can see the applicability and detection rules.

41
We'll rerelease 3.8.8 with a fixed detection and applicability, it will supersede the existing 3.8.8 that you have published. I checked 3.9 as well and it is already good and will only upgrade existing 3.9 installs. The fixed 3.8.8 should be in today's catalog update, I'm just finishing testing on it.

42
I've located the issue, we'll have the rules fixed in a catalog release later this week. Thank you for bringing this to our attention.

43
Hi,

This is not the intended behavior, we'll check it out.

44
How long ago was this app created? We actually fixed this issue in a recent publisher release but the app would need to be deleted and recreated in Intune. Could you try to do that and let me know if the recreated app is able to detect right?

45
Hi,

Is this in Intune or ConfigMgr or WSUS/ConfigMgr Updates? The issue here is that is not a valid version string, but I think we can work around it.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9