Community
- Command Central
- MVP Program
- Monthly Mission
- Blogs
- Groups
- Events
- Media Vault
Products
- Observability
- Network Management
- Application Management
- IT Security
- IT Service Management
- System Management
- Database Management
Content Exchange
- SolarWinds Platform
- Server & Application Monitor
- Database Performance Analyzer
- Server Configuration Monitor
- Network Performance Monitor
- Network Configuration Manager
- SQL Sentry
- Web Help Desk
Free Tools & Trials
Store

Install rules not working

kevinr

Install does not care what it says....

We add a key to check for on some systems that has been working.

But now does no.

As a test I change it to say on install in ia86 system it still installs onx 32 and x64

-<sdp:InstalledRule SchemaVersion="1.0">

-<lar:Or>

-<lar:And>

<bar:Processor Architecture="6"/>

<bar:RegExpandSz Key="HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE"Subkey="Software\FPC\Flash"Value="Flash"RegType32="true"Comparison="EqualTo"Data="Yes"/>

<bar:RegSzToVersion Key="HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE"Subkey="SOFTWARE\Macromedia\FlashPlayerActiveX"Value="Version"RegType32="true"Comparison="EqualTo"Data="11.3.300.270"/>

<bar:FileExists Path="System32\Macromed\Flash\Flash32_11_3_300_270.ocx"Csidl="36"/>

</lar:And>

-<lar:And>

<bar:Processor Architecture="6"/>

<bar:RegExpandSz Key="HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE"Subkey="Software\FPC\Flash"Value="Flash"RegType32="false"Comparison="EqualTo"Data="Yes"/>

<bar:RegSzToVersion Key="HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE"Subkey="SOFTWARE\Wow6432Node\Macromedia\FlashPlayerActiveX"Value="Version"RegType32="false"Comparison="EqualTo"Data="11.3.300.270"/>

<bar:FileExists Path="SysWOW64\Macromed\Flash\Flash32_11_3_300_270.ocx"Csidl="36"/>

<bar:RegSzToVersion Key="HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE"Subkey="SOFTWARE\Macromedia\FlashPlayerActiveX"Value="Version"RegType32="false"Comparison="EqualTo"Data="11.3.300.270"/>

<bar:FileExists Path="System32\Macromed\Flash\flash64_11_3_300_270.ocx"Csidl="36"/>

</lar:And>

</lar:Or>

</sdp:InstalledRule>

Please help

Find more posts tagged with

Accepted answers

All comments

IGFCSS.DSI

Hi kevinr,

I'm not very sure to what you want to do. Can you explain better you goal?

The XML from your post is for the InstalledRule and, if I got it right, you want to test the applicability of the Flash update to IA64, right? Or do you want to test if it was installed?

kevinr

The goal is to stop it installing on Developers system that why I added

Key="HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE"Subkey="Software\FPC\Flash"Value="Flash"RegType32="true"Comparison="EqualTo"Data="Yes"/>

This has always until now.

So as a test I change it to IA64 and still install.

Rules are broken….

Please help

LGarvin

I'm not aware that there is an Itanium edition of Flash. Preventing Flash from not installing on Itanium systems is trivial. Please review the provided Flash packages in the synchronized content for great examples of how do define rules for Flash updates. Either add two Processor Architecture rules in in an 'Any' block testing for x86 or x64, or add a single NOT rule that excludes IA64 systems. These go in the Prerequisite Rules section. Once you've isolated the package to the correct processor architectures, generally you won't need to do that level of testing anymore. If you actually have a version of Flash for IA64, then define a Processor Architecture rule for 'equals IA64'.

If, beyond that set of basic tests, you further want to restrict the updating of the Flash Player on systems that have a Flash Developer's edition installed, then simply test in an Applicability Rule for a NOT Registry Key Exists or NOT File Exists rule that would uniquely identfy the machine as a development system --or where the absence of that key, value, or file would uniquely identify the machine as NOT being a development system.

As for the actual rules posted -- rather than post the XML, generally it's easier to simply post the English-language statement of the rule. I don't have the schema memorized, so I'm not able to interpret your actual rules without a fair amount of research effort. What I can tell you, though, is that if you properly define your Processor Architecture rules in the Prerequisite Rules collection, then you won't need to do processor architecture tests in the Installed Rule ruleset because that ruleset would only ever be evaluated on IA64 systems anyway -- once the Prereq Rules have excluded the package from further consideration because the package and architecture don't match.

kevinr

The rules do not work.

NOT Registry Key Exists or NOT File Exists or ANY other do not work.

It does not care what I put there.

I'm not aware that there is an Itanium edition of Flash... That is only a test to show your support team it does not work. ( that did not help just said not supported pst here.)

kevinr

What email address do you want it sent to?

LGarvin

Send it to lawrence.garvin@solarwinds.com

LGarvin

Greetings Kevin

Thank you for sending the package definition. It helped tremendously, and I believe I know exactly what the solution for you is.

As I understand, just to repeat what we've said but to make sure I fully understand -- you want to prevent the installation of the Flash package on developer machines.

This objective would not be achieved by defining rules in the Installed Rules ruleset. The Installed Rules ruleset identifies how the Windows Update Agent knows that the package is already installed.

It is the Applicability Rules ruleset that is used to determine IF an update should be installed.

So, in the case where you do not want to install the update on systems with the FPC registry key, use the same rule you have already defined in the Installed Rules ruleset, except put it in the Applicability Rules ruleset, and change it to a *NOT* rule. This will prevent the update from being evaluated as "applicable" on any system is identified as a development system.

kevinr

Yes correct.

Does not help still install does not care about the rule as a not in Applicability Rules