Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 8 years ago
Since munki uses Apple's mechanisms to download Apple updates, this is
unavoidable unless we delete all downloaded updates every run and re-download
them, which is terribly inefficient. Admins transitioning to munki will need to
be aware of this and plan accordingly.
Original comment by gregnea...@mac.com
on 9 Feb 2011 at 2:24
this bug allready made two of our clients unusable by installing a 10.6.4 over
an 10.6.6
Original comment by he.kess...@googlemail.com
on 10 Feb 2011 at 12:33
How is that even possible?
Original comment by gregnea...@mac.com
on 10 Feb 2011 at 1:44
is it really that way? what happens if you uncheck automatic downloading in
Apple SoftwareUpdate Preferences, then delete everything inside of
/Library/Updates. after this procedure the only process which would fillup this
directory would be munki itself and you only would get into trouble if someone
refuses to update for a long period. or am i wrong?
Original comment by he.kess...@googlemail.com
on 10 Feb 2011 at 6:52
"what happens if you uncheck automatic downloading in Apple SoftwareUpdate
Preferences, then delete everything inside of /Library/Updates. after this
procedure the only process which would fillup this directory would be munki
itself"
An admin user can run Software Update manually as well, which would populate
this directory.
Original comment by gregnea...@mac.com
on 10 Feb 2011 at 7:32
Allister, are you missing some steps from the steps to reproduce?
Are you between 2 & 4:
- pointing apple software update / munki to a different software update
server/sucatalog?
- installing some of the apple software updates by some other mechanism (making
them no longer necessary)?
- changing some flag that should favour combos over patch?
Perhaps I'm not understanding something in your setup. The auto-downloaded
updates should be the ones Apple thinks your computer needs. Why would apple
software update think your computer needs different updates after installing
munki? Something else appears to have changed that invalidates this logic at
your site.
Original comment by rrmiddleton@gmail.com
on 12 Feb 2011 at 4:17
Hey Mr. Middleton,
Between 2 and 4 I performed none of the above, apple's SUS, no installs, no
flags(although I'm intrigued - do flags to prefer combo's instead of delta's
exist?). The auto-downloaded ones are deltas accrued over time, and apple
apparently did not reap existing updates from that folder in both situations I
observed at the same environment.
Man, it would be cool to select combo updates instead, we would need to take
into account that that would invalidate the need for certain packages(e.g.:
safari 5.0.2 being rolled into 10.6.5 if I recall correctly), which would add a
step/reboot when not using a munki server.
Also, I wanted to point out that I do consider this a defect that harms
bootstrapping in a viable usage of the product, since it is humanly possible to
install 'sub-optimal' packages when starting deployment, but should still be a
lower-priority issue to the project.
Now if I could get 'softwareupdate --schedule off' to work on the first try, it
doesn't work until you toggle it once in the GUI; the CLI doesn't seem to
initialize the ByHost scheduler pref properly. Funny too, that the only thing
that pref does when you turn the schedule off is set the next date to check to
be Dec 31st, the year 4000 at 7PM - somebody's idea of a joke at Apple.
Original comment by allister...@gtempaccount.com
on 12 Feb 2011 at 4:36
This should be addressed with the new Apple update code merged to trunk in
r1259.
Original comment by gregnea...@mac.com
on 2 Aug 2011 at 4:18
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
allister...@gtempaccount.com
on 9 Feb 2011 at 2:09