IE8 rc for IE8 beta users

In message <qmdun45eq95hso74qe4h97phqq3dgim1e1@4ax.com> Dave Warren
<dave-usenet@djwcomputers.com> was claimed to have wrote:

>Does anyone know if the IE8 release candidate will hit WSUS or other
>update services for existing IE8 beta users, or do we need to find a way
>to identify and manually update our IE8 beta users?

Assuming this won't be happening, I wandered over to the catalog and
found the IE8rc1 updates.

However, I'm seeing two of every update for every platform, one under
the "Updates" classification and one under the "Update Rollups"
classification.

Any idea what the difference is, or should I load all into WSUS and let
WSUS figure it out?

(Again, the goal is just to update IE8 beta users, not to update all
machines until the public release)

"Dave Warren" <dave-usenet@djwcomputers.com> wrote in message
news:fld4o4tbro042gr32nu5atr9q6s1a1spkb@4ax.com...

> However, I'm seeing two of every update for every platform, one under
> the "Updates" classification and one under the "Update Rollups"
> classification.
>
> Any idea what the difference is,


Most likely it's a snafu amongst those responsible for building and
publishing the metadata packaging.

Perhaps some confusion over which classification a "RC" release belongs in,
repackaging of the update for the correct classification
and then failing to (or still waiting for) the original (incorrect) package
to be unpublished.

Did you happen to note the publication dates on the packages?


> or should I load all into WSUS and let WSUS figure it out?

It can't hurt to load 'em all up and see what comes out in the wash.

I suspect, though, you'll find all of 'em get classified as "Needed",
and it may well be that the only difference is the Update Classification.

--
Lawrence Garvin, M.S., MCITP(x2), MCTS(x5), MCP(x7), MCBMSP
Principal/CTO, Onsite Technology Solutions, Houston, Texas
Microsoft MVP - Software Distribution (2005-2009)

MS WSUS Website: http://www.microsoft.com/wsus
My Websites: http://www.onsitechsolutions.com;
http://wsusinfo.onsitechsolutions.com
My MVP Profile: http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/pro...awrence.Garvin

In message <uL7WT8mgJHA.3708@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl> "Lawrence Garvin
\(MVP\)" <lawrence@news.postalias> was claimed to have wrote:

>"Dave Warren" <dave-usenet@djwcomputers.com> wrote in message
>news:fld4o4tbro042gr32nu5atr9q6s1a1spkb@4ax.com.. .
>
>> However, I'm seeing two of every update for every platform, one under
>> the "Updates" classification and one under the "Update Rollups"
>> classification.
>>
>> Any idea what the difference is,
>
>
>Most likely it's a snafu amongst those responsible for building and
>publishing the metadata packaging.
>
>Perhaps some confusion over which classification a "RC" release belongs in,
>repackaging of the update for the correct classification
>and then failing to (or still waiting for) the original (incorrect) package
>to be unpublished.
>
>Did you happen to note the publication dates on the packages?

The same dates on all, 1/27/2009. It also looks like some, but not all,
have the "will require interaction" warning icon.

I suspect it was just metadata confusion. They're loading now, I'll see
which items go into "Needed" status.

Thanks.

In message <sml4o49220hk3bhodj0pasudh7cec5e27o@4ax.com> Dave Warren
<dave-usenet@djwcomputers.com> was claimed to have wrote:

>In message <uL7WT8mgJHA.3708@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl> "Lawrence Garvin
>\(MVP\)" <lawrence@news.postalias> was claimed to have wrote:
>
>>"Dave Warren" <dave-usenet@djwcomputers.com> wrote in message
>>news:fld4o4tbro042gr32nu5atr9q6s1a1spkb@4ax.com. ..
>>
>>> However, I'm seeing two of every update for every platform, one under
>>> the "Updates" classification and one under the "Update Rollups"
>>> classification.
>>>
>>> Any idea what the difference is,
>>
>>
>>Most likely it's a snafu amongst those responsible for building and
>>publishing the metadata packaging.
>>
>>Perhaps some confusion over which classification a "RC" release belongs in,
>>repackaging of the update for the correct classification
>>and then failing to (or still waiting for) the original (incorrect) package
>>to be unpublished.
>>
>>Did you happen to note the publication dates on the packages?
>
>The same dates on all, 1/27/2009. It also looks like some, but not all,
>have the "will require interaction" warning icon.
>
>I suspect it was just metadata confusion. They're loading now, I'll see
>which items go into "Needed" status.

Interestingly only the "Update Rollups" items are changing to needed,
the others are not showing as needed by any computers, IE6/IE7/IE8beta.

I'm waiting on a couple specific machines to check in before approving
anything, but it looks like this should do the job nicely.

Thanks.