Re: SLM 7.6 Patch 001 - 2 directories on FTP site..
Agreed – will find out what the story is and correct it! From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza Sent: Monday, November 08, 2010 9:21 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: SLM 7.6 Patch 001 - 2 directories on FTP site.. ** That’s what I thought by the file sizes.. It’s just odd that they were put there on two different dates.. Joe From: Weigand, John<mailto:john_weig...@bmc.com> Sent: Monday, November 08, 2010 7:13 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG> Subject: Re: SLM 7.6 Patch 001 - 2 directories on FTP site.. ** Joe, The files are the same between the 2 directories so either one is fine. I will look into the duplicate directory issue and have it corrected. Thanks, John From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza Sent: Monday, November 08, 2010 5:25 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: SLM 7.6 Patch 001 - 2 directories on FTP site.. ** Both look like they have identical files. Is this just a mistake? Or should we stick to the one having a later date? FTP directory /smbu_patches//slm/7.6.00/patch001/ at epddownload.bmc.com 03/30/2010 12:00AM141,849,265 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.aix.tar.gz 03/30/2010 12:00AM178,804,863 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.hpuxitanium.tar.gz 03/30/2010 12:00AM140,298,908 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.hpuxrisc.tar.gz 03/30/2010 12:00AM102,733,880 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.linux.tar.gz 03/30/2010 12:00AM133,104,453 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.solaris.tar.gz 03/30/2010 12:00AM 64,243,328 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.windows.zip 03/30/2010 12:00AM132,918 SLMTB76p1.pdf FTP directory /smbu_patches//slm/7.6.00/Patch001/ at epddownload.bmc.com 03/29/2010 12:00AM141,849,265 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.aix.tar.gz 03/29/2010 12:00AM178,804,863 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.hpuxitanium.tar.gz 03/29/2010 12:00AM140,298,908 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.hpuxrisc.tar.gz 03/29/2010 12:00AM102,733,880 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.linux.tar.gz 03/29/2010 12:00AM133,104,453 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.solaris.tar.gz 03/29/2010 12:00AM 64,243,328 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.windows.zip 03/29/2010 12:00AM132,918 SLMTB76p1.pdf Notice the directory names are identical but Unix sees capitalized and non capitalized file names as different.. Joe _attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_
Re: SLM 7.6 Patch 001 - 2 directories on FTP site..
That’s what I thought by the file sizes.. It’s just odd that they were put there on two different dates.. Joe From: Weigand, John Sent: Monday, November 08, 2010 7:13 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: SLM 7.6 Patch 001 - 2 directories on FTP site.. ** Joe, The files are the same between the 2 directories so either one is fine. I will look into the duplicate directory issue and have it corrected. Thanks, John From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza Sent: Monday, November 08, 2010 5:25 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: SLM 7.6 Patch 001 - 2 directories on FTP site.. ** Both look like they have identical files. Is this just a mistake? Or should we stick to the one having a later date? FTP directory /smbu_patches//slm/7.6.00/patch001/ at epddownload.bmc.com 03/30/2010 12:00AM141,849,265 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.aix.tar.gz 03/30/2010 12:00AM178,804,863 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.hpuxitanium.tar.gz 03/30/2010 12:00AM140,298,908 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.hpuxrisc.tar.gz 03/30/2010 12:00AM102,733,880 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.linux.tar.gz 03/30/2010 12:00AM133,104,453 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.solaris.tar.gz 03/30/2010 12:00AM 64,243,328 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.windows.zip 03/30/2010 12:00AM132,918 SLMTB76p1.pdf FTP directory /smbu_patches//slm/7.6.00/Patch001/ at epddownload.bmc.com 03/29/2010 12:00AM141,849,265 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.aix.tar.gz 03/29/2010 12:00AM178,804,863 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.hpuxitanium.tar.gz 03/29/2010 12:00AM140,298,908 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.hpuxrisc.tar.gz 03/29/2010 12:00AM102,733,880 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.linux.tar.gz 03/29/2010 12:00AM133,104,453 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.solaris.tar.gz 03/29/2010 12:00AM 64,243,328 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.windows.zip 03/29/2010 12:00AM132,918 SLMTB76p1.pdf Notice the directory names are identical but Unix sees capitalized and non capitalized file names as different.. Joe ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
Re: SLM 7.6 Patch 001 - 2 directories on FTP site..
Joe, The files are the same between the 2 directories so either one is fine. I will look into the duplicate directory issue and have it corrected. Thanks, John From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza Sent: Monday, November 08, 2010 5:25 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: SLM 7.6 Patch 001 - 2 directories on FTP site.. ** Both look like they have identical files. Is this just a mistake? Or should we stick to the one having a later date? FTP directory /smbu_patches//slm/7.6.00/patch001/ at epddownload.bmc.com 03/30/2010 12:00AM141,849,265 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.aix.tar.gz 03/30/2010 12:00AM178,804,863 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.hpuxitanium.tar.gz 03/30/2010 12:00AM140,298,908 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.hpuxrisc.tar.gz 03/30/2010 12:00AM102,733,880 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.linux.tar.gz 03/30/2010 12:00AM133,104,453 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.solaris.tar.gz 03/30/2010 12:00AM 64,243,328 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.windows.zip 03/30/2010 12:00AM132,918 SLMTB76p1.pdf FTP directory /smbu_patches//slm/7.6.00/Patch001/ at epddownload.bmc.com 03/29/2010 12:00AM141,849,265 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.aix.tar.gz 03/29/2010 12:00AM178,804,863 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.hpuxitanium.tar.gz 03/29/2010 12:00AM140,298,908 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.hpuxrisc.tar.gz 03/29/2010 12:00AM102,733,880 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.linux.tar.gz 03/29/2010 12:00AM133,104,453 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.solaris.tar.gz 03/29/2010 12:00AM 64,243,328 SLM7.6.00.Patch001.windows.zip 03/29/2010 12:00AM132,918 SLMTB76p1.pdf Notice the directory names are identical but Unix sees capitalized and non capitalized file names as different.. Joe _attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
Re: SLM 7.6 Patch 001
Can't argue there. On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 1:59 PM, strauss wrote: > ** > > Maybe, but once they have made it available in their normal patch search > interface (you didn’t have to traverse ftp directories from somewhere else > to find it), then in theory they have released it. I opened an issue on it > yesterday, so they are, in fact, looking into it. > > > > Christopher Strauss, Ph.D. > Call Tracking Administration Manager > University of North Texas Computing & IT Center > http://itsm.unt.edu/ > > *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: > arsl...@arslist.org] *On Behalf Of *Jason Miller > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 31, 2010 11:51 AM > > *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > *Subject:* Re: SLM 7.6 Patch 001 > > > > ** I just checked and there are two patch001/Patch001 directories. The > files in the directory have different dates. Maybe they are correcting it > right now? > > > I think this is where David Easter reminds us to wait for the official > notice that a patch has been released :-) > > Jason > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 8:01 AM, strauss wrote: > > ** > > It isn’t the first time, by a long shot, that their installers have used an > outdated client executable. Sort of like the installers that only worked if > Demo had a blank password. > > > > This patch was also supposed to “fix” problems with the SLM Help files. I > still have to try it on a different server set to confirm it, but on the > first one I tried it on it actually made things worse; instead of help > launching from the SLM Console to a location other than the main index, it > doesn’t launch at all – the URL is completely invalid. > > > > It’s just one of many woes impeding our progress towards an ITSM 7.6 > implementation; the 7.5.00 Patch 004 User Tool was dead on arrival – hangs > completely on any console or page with a flashboard embedded in it. They > just got me an updated aruser.exe that appears to work now (the fifth > version since the patch); I think they had left out support for a Default > Web Path that was https: instead of http:, but I haven’t gotten an > explanation. > > > > Christopher Strauss, Ph.D. > Call Tracking Administration Manager > University of North Texas Computing & IT Center > http://itsm.unt.edu/ > > *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: > arsl...@arslist.org] *On Behalf Of *Guillaume Rheault > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 31, 2010 9:31 AM > *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > *Subject:* Re: SLM 7.6 Patch 001 > > > > ** > > wow... good catch, that is messed up > So BMC itself is using something unsupported > > Guillaume > -- > > *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [ > arsl...@arslist.org] on behalf of strauss [stra...@unt.edu] > *Sent:* Tuesday, March 30, 2010 4:29 PM > *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > *Subject:* SLM 7.6 Patch 001 > > ** > > FYI, SLM 7.6.00 Patch 001 was released today, and includes updated Help. > Unfortunately they used a version 5.1.x installer for the help (not the > patch), so if your server is limited to a minimum-api-version of 10 (ARS > 6.0) or higher like ours was, the help installer will fail to authenticate. > > > > Christopher Strauss, Ph.D. > Call Tracking Administration Manager > University of North Texas Computing & IT Center > http://itsm.unt.edu/ > > _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ > > _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ > > _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ > > > _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ > _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ > ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
Re: SLM 7.6 Patch 001
Maybe, but once they have made it available in their normal patch search interface (you didn't have to traverse ftp directories from somewhere else to find it), then in theory they have released it. I opened an issue on it yesterday, so they are, in fact, looking into it. Christopher Strauss, Ph.D. Call Tracking Administration Manager University of North Texas Computing & IT Center http://itsm.unt.edu/ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Jason Miller Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2010 11:51 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: SLM 7.6 Patch 001 ** I just checked and there are two patch001/Patch001 directories. The files in the directory have different dates. Maybe they are correcting it right now? I think this is where David Easter reminds us to wait for the official notice that a patch has been released :-) Jason On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 8:01 AM, strauss mailto:stra...@unt.edu>> wrote: ** It isn't the first time, by a long shot, that their installers have used an outdated client executable. Sort of like the installers that only worked if Demo had a blank password. This patch was also supposed to "fix" problems with the SLM Help files. I still have to try it on a different server set to confirm it, but on the first one I tried it on it actually made things worse; instead of help launching from the SLM Console to a location other than the main index, it doesn't launch at all - the URL is completely invalid. It's just one of many woes impeding our progress towards an ITSM 7.6 implementation; the 7.5.00 Patch 004 User Tool was dead on arrival - hangs completely on any console or page with a flashboard embedded in it. They just got me an updated aruser.exe that appears to work now (the fifth version since the patch); I think they had left out support for a Default Web Path that was https: instead of http:, but I haven't gotten an explanation. Christopher Strauss, Ph.D. Call Tracking Administration Manager University of North Texas Computing & IT Center http://itsm.unt.edu/ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>] On Behalf Of Guillaume Rheault Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2010 9:31 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG> Subject: Re: SLM 7.6 Patch 001 ** wow... good catch, that is messed up So BMC itself is using something unsupported Guillaume From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [arsl...@arslist.org<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>] on behalf of strauss [stra...@unt.edu<mailto:stra...@unt.edu>] Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 4:29 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG> Subject: SLM 7.6 Patch 001 ** FYI, SLM 7.6.00 Patch 001 was released today, and includes updated Help. Unfortunately they used a version 5.1.x installer for the help (not the patch), so if your server is limited to a minimum-api-version of 10 (ARS 6.0) or higher like ours was, the help installer will fail to authenticate. Christopher Strauss, Ph.D. Call Tracking Administration Manager University of North Texas Computing & IT Center http://itsm.unt.edu/ _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com<http://www.wwrug.com> ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com<http://www.wwrug.com> ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com<http://www.wwrug.com> ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
Re: SLM 7.6 Patch 001
I just checked and there are two patch001/Patch001 directories. The files in the directory have different dates. Maybe they are correcting it right now? I think this is where David Easter reminds us to wait for the official notice that a patch has been released :-) Jason On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 8:01 AM, strauss wrote: > ** > > It isn’t the first time, by a long shot, that their installers have used an > outdated client executable. Sort of like the installers that only worked if > Demo had a blank password. > > > > This patch was also supposed to “fix” problems with the SLM Help files. I > still have to try it on a different server set to confirm it, but on the > first one I tried it on it actually made things worse; instead of help > launching from the SLM Console to a location other than the main index, it > doesn’t launch at all – the URL is completely invalid. > > > > It’s just one of many woes impeding our progress towards an ITSM 7.6 > implementation; the 7.5.00 Patch 004 User Tool was dead on arrival – hangs > completely on any console or page with a flashboard embedded in it. They > just got me an updated aruser.exe that appears to work now (the fifth > version since the patch); I think they had left out support for a Default > Web Path that was https: instead of http:, but I haven’t gotten an > explanation. > > > > Christopher Strauss, Ph.D. > Call Tracking Administration Manager > University of North Texas Computing & IT Center > http://itsm.unt.edu/ > > *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: > arsl...@arslist.org] *On Behalf Of *Guillaume Rheault > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 31, 2010 9:31 AM > *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > *Subject:* Re: SLM 7.6 Patch 001 > > > > ** > > wow... good catch, that is messed up > So BMC itself is using something unsupported > > Guillaume > -- > > *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [ > arsl...@arslist.org] on behalf of strauss [stra...@unt.edu] > *Sent:* Tuesday, March 30, 2010 4:29 PM > *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > *Subject:* SLM 7.6 Patch 001 > > ** > > FYI, SLM 7.6.00 Patch 001 was released today, and includes updated Help. > Unfortunately they used a version 5.1.x installer for the help (not the > patch), so if your server is limited to a minimum-api-version of 10 (ARS > 6.0) or higher like ours was, the help installer will fail to authenticate. > > > > Christopher Strauss, Ph.D. > Call Tracking Administration Manager > University of North Texas Computing & IT Center > http://itsm.unt.edu/ > > _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ > > _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ > _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ > ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
Re: SLM 7.6 Patch 001
Well, installers are becoming more and more complex, so this does not bode well... It is now possible (and BMC supported) to have different versions of modules of the ITSM suite in the same server, such as Service Desk 7.0.3 and Change Mgmt 7.51 or 7.6: individual modules can be upgraded individually. So the installer needs to be smart enough to upgrade the modules at different versions, and therefore to account for different versions... For all this complexity to work, there has to be more quality put in the installers, otherwise nobody will even try having different ITSM modules at different versions People will keep upgrading the whole enchilada. BTW, I would not want to be on the bleeding edge of running different ITSM modules at different versions, I prefer other customers to try it first and find the bugs :-) Guillaume From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [arsl...@arslist.org] on behalf of Rick Cook [remedyr...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2010 11:09 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: SLM 7.6 Patch 001 ** Yeah, at times like that, I am reminded of the "Quality" mug in the Dilbert strip. That would be the mug that left the "Q" off of the word, then the handle fell off, the mug broke, and Asok got shards. Epic Fail. BMC/Remedy does so many things well. It is too bad that building quality installers isn't among them. Rick From: strauss Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:01:08 -0500 To: Subject: Re: SLM 7.6 Patch 001 It isn’t the first time, by a long shot, that their installers have used an outdated client executable. Sort of like the installers that only worked if Demo had a blank password. This patch was also supposed to “fix” problems with the SLM Help files. I still have to try it on a different server set to confirm it, but on the first one I tried it on it actually made things worse; instead of help launching from the SLM Console to a location other than the main index, it doesn’t launch at all – the URL is completely invalid. It’s just one of many woes impeding our progress towards an ITSM 7.6 implementation; the 7.5.00 Patch 004 User Tool was dead on arrival – hangs completely on any console or page with a flashboard embedded in it. They just got me an updated aruser.exe that appears to work now (the fifth version since the patch); I think they had left out support for a Default Web Path that was https: instead of http:, but I haven’t gotten an explanation. Christopher Strauss, Ph.D. Call Tracking Administration Manager University of North Texas Computing & IT Center http://itsm.unt.edu/ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Guillaume Rheault Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2010 9:31 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: SLM 7.6 Patch 001 ** wow... good catch, that is messed up So BMC itself is using something unsupported Guillaume From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [arsl...@arslist.org] on behalf of strauss [stra...@unt.edu] Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 4:29 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: SLM 7.6 Patch 001 ** FYI, SLM 7.6.00 Patch 001 was released today, and includes updated Help. Unfortunately they used a version 5.1.x installer for the help (not the patch), so if your server is limited to a minimum-api-version of 10 (ARS 6.0) or higher like ours was, the help installer will fail to authenticate. Christopher Strauss, Ph.D. Call Tracking Administration Manager University of North Texas Computing & IT Center http://itsm.unt.edu/ _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
Re: SLM 7.6 Patch 001
Yeah, at times like that, I am reminded of the "Quality" mug in the Dilbert strip. That would be the mug that left the "Q" off of the word, then the handle fell off, the mug broke, and Asok got shards. Epic Fail. BMC/Remedy does so many things well. It is too bad that building quality installers isn't among them. Rick -Original Message- From: strauss Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:01:08 To: Subject: Re: SLM 7.6 Patch 001 It isn't the first time, by a long shot, that their installers have used an outdated client executable. Sort of like the installers that only worked if Demo had a blank password. This patch was also supposed to "fix" problems with the SLM Help files. I still have to try it on a different server set to confirm it, but on the first one I tried it on it actually made things worse; instead of help launching from the SLM Console to a location other than the main index, it doesn't launch at all - the URL is completely invalid. It's just one of many woes impeding our progress towards an ITSM 7.6 implementation; the 7.5.00 Patch 004 User Tool was dead on arrival - hangs completely on any console or page with a flashboard embedded in it. They just got me an updated aruser.exe that appears to work now (the fifth version since the patch); I think they had left out support for a Default Web Path that was https: instead of http:, but I haven't gotten an explanation. Christopher Strauss, Ph.D. Call Tracking Administration Manager University of North Texas Computing & IT Center http://itsm.unt.edu/ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Guillaume Rheault Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2010 9:31 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: SLM 7.6 Patch 001 ** wow... good catch, that is messed up So BMC itself is using something unsupported Guillaume From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [arsl...@arslist.org] on behalf of strauss [stra...@unt.edu] Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 4:29 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: SLM 7.6 Patch 001 ** FYI, SLM 7.6.00 Patch 001 was released today, and includes updated Help. Unfortunately they used a version 5.1.x installer for the help (not the patch), so if your server is limited to a minimum-api-version of 10 (ARS 6.0) or higher like ours was, the help installer will fail to authenticate. Christopher Strauss, Ph.D. Call Tracking Administration Manager University of North Texas Computing & IT Center http://itsm.unt.edu/ _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
Re: SLM 7.6 Patch 001
It isn't the first time, by a long shot, that their installers have used an outdated client executable. Sort of like the installers that only worked if Demo had a blank password. This patch was also supposed to "fix" problems with the SLM Help files. I still have to try it on a different server set to confirm it, but on the first one I tried it on it actually made things worse; instead of help launching from the SLM Console to a location other than the main index, it doesn't launch at all - the URL is completely invalid. It's just one of many woes impeding our progress towards an ITSM 7.6 implementation; the 7.5.00 Patch 004 User Tool was dead on arrival - hangs completely on any console or page with a flashboard embedded in it. They just got me an updated aruser.exe that appears to work now (the fifth version since the patch); I think they had left out support for a Default Web Path that was https: instead of http:, but I haven't gotten an explanation. Christopher Strauss, Ph.D. Call Tracking Administration Manager University of North Texas Computing & IT Center http://itsm.unt.edu/ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Guillaume Rheault Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2010 9:31 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: SLM 7.6 Patch 001 ** wow... good catch, that is messed up So BMC itself is using something unsupported Guillaume From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [arsl...@arslist.org] on behalf of strauss [stra...@unt.edu] Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 4:29 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: SLM 7.6 Patch 001 ** FYI, SLM 7.6.00 Patch 001 was released today, and includes updated Help. Unfortunately they used a version 5.1.x installer for the help (not the patch), so if your server is limited to a minimum-api-version of 10 (ARS 6.0) or higher like ours was, the help installer will fail to authenticate. Christopher Strauss, Ph.D. Call Tracking Administration Manager University of North Texas Computing & IT Center http://itsm.unt.edu/ _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
Re: SLM 7.6 Patch 001
wow... good catch, that is messed up So BMC itself is using something unsupported Guillaume From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [arsl...@arslist.org] on behalf of strauss [stra...@unt.edu] Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 4:29 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: SLM 7.6 Patch 001 ** FYI, SLM 7.6.00 Patch 001 was released today, and includes updated Help. Unfortunately they used a version 5.1.x installer for the help (not the patch), so if your server is limited to a minimum-api-version of 10 (ARS 6.0) or higher like ours was, the help installer will fail to authenticate. Christopher Strauss, Ph.D. Call Tracking Administration Manager University of North Texas Computing & IT Center http://itsm.unt.edu/ _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
