Hello all,

I'm attempting to install a product via SCCM - my script installs the product fine when executed interactively (using a logged on admin account).

It also installs perfectly when I change the 'environment' settings in the SCCM package so that the program runs with user's rights - as long as the logged on user is also an admin of course...

So my question is can I adjust the MSI installation (using a transform) so that the 'stuff' carried out when installing the software in the users context is carried out when installing via SCCM and therefore in the system context?

I have already tried a number of things including adding the ALLUSERS=1 parameter to my command line.

Any help appreciated.....

Mos
0 Comments   [ + ] Show Comments

Comments

Please log in to comment

Rating comments in this legacy AppDeploy message board thread won't reorder them,
so that the conversation will remain readable.

Answers

0
forgot to mention I've also opened a ticket with the vendor but may have to wait some time before I get response....
Answered 07/12/2010 by: mosquat
Orange Belt

Please log in to comment
0
It *sounds* like there are Custom Actions set in the UI sequence which are not duplicated in the Execute sequence. Thus, when you run interactively (either on the machine itself, or with SCCM set to interact with the user) a UI is displayed, meaning that the CAs get executed. In "normal" distro mode - with no UI - the CAs are skipped, because they're not in the Execute sequence.

You can prove that by running 2 installs: one with a normal UI (MSIEXEC /i WHATEVER.MSI) and one with none (MSIEXEC /i WHATEVER.MSI /QN). If the latter produces a "broken" install....case proved, m'lud.

If this is a vendor-supplied MSI, create a transform and copy the rogue CAs to the Execute sequence. You may need to set the option such that it only executes once (in case the package ever gets run intercatively, the CAs may not tolerate being run more than once.)
Answered 07/12/2010 by: VBScab
Red Belt

Please log in to comment
0
Yes looks like the test you suggested proves that CAs (or something) are only applied during "normal" mode so thanks very much for this useful tip.

I'll work on the transform tomorrow and feed back

Thanks again
Answered 07/12/2010 by: mosquat
Orange Belt

Please log in to comment
0
Drat...What I should have added is to add the logging switch (/l*v %temp%\whatever.log). You could have then compared the two logs, making identifying the missing CAs a little easier.
Answered 07/12/2010 by: VBScab
Red Belt

Please log in to comment
0
Getting no where with this...I created logfiles using the /L*v switches but on comparison could not really see any CAs that were being applied interactively but not when in the system context (i seached for text CUSTOM ACTION) - I'm sure that I was able to produce a broken installation yesterday using the /QN switch but this seems to work correctly today - must've been bleary eyed...

I've inserted any CAs that are missing from the 'Execute' sequence but present in the UI sequence (using a transform) hoping I'd get lucky (although there are actually more in the execute sequence) but the problem remains...

I have created log files and searched for the CA that is meant to configure custom properties and it has got the correct information logged (i.e. the components I have selected are marked as "True" and the server path is marked with the correct "\\servername\share" details) yet the components are not installed...but as far as I can tell the server details are being passed correctly...

Vendor hopes to get back to me tomorrow with some details but would like to hear from anyone who can shed some light/pass on some tips...
Answered 07/13/2010 by: mosquat
Orange Belt

Please log in to comment
0
Some additional info that may make sense to someone else....

installing this product silently appears to be based on a property called "ROLLOUT" which must be set to TRUE to suppress all UI windows - i.e. using the msi command /qn and specifying a valid server path for another property that requires input (SI) does not suppress the UI - it's not until ROLLOUT is used that the entire installation is silent.
Answered 07/13/2010 by: mosquat
Orange Belt

Please log in to comment
0
Properties can be set successfully in a transform but are still not applied when executed from system context - vendor is looking into this at the mo...will feedback further info
Answered 07/16/2010 by: mosquat
Orange Belt

Please log in to comment
0
Eh? What difference does system context make? A property is a property is a property, irrespective of context.
Answered 07/16/2010 by: VBScab
Red Belt

Please log in to comment
0
Are you sure this is nothing to do with having to add your property to the CustomActionData to make it available in deferred context?

PJ
Answered 07/16/2010 by: pjgeutjens
Red Belt

Please log in to comment
0
ORIGINAL: VBScab

Eh? What difference does system context make? A property is a property is a property, irrespective of context.


So setting the property in a transform should work regardless of context...not sure why then the software installs perfectly when using this transform and executing the vbscript I'm using when logged on yet when executed via SCCM the additional components are not installed....it works again when I get SCCM to run the program with 'users rights' (as long as the logged on user is an admin)
Answered 07/16/2010 by: mosquat
Orange Belt

Please log in to comment
0
ORIGINAL: pjgeutjens

Are you sure this is nothing to do with having to add your property to the CustomActionData to make it available in deferred context?

PJ


I think this or something similar is required to make it work - I'm still learning the ropes tho really so it may take me a while to test this out ;-)

thanks (both) for your comments
Answered 07/16/2010 by: mosquat
Orange Belt

Please log in to comment
0
Would it be possible for you to tell us the name of the product you're trying to deploy via SCCM? If it's a mainstream application, maybe someone else has already run over the same hurdles you're trying to overcome....
Answered 07/16/2010 by: Lucid
Purple Belt

Please log in to comment
0
No it's not a mainstream app, have checked the KBs and there's no entry for it - will be widely used in our organisation though...
Answered 07/19/2010 by: mosquat
Orange Belt

Please log in to comment
Answer this question or Comment on this question for clarity