Hi David,
I should not have posted that without more information, sorry.
I was referring back to a message I posted originally on June 1, with the
subject:
Issues with Win2K SYSTEM OBJECT/SYSTEM FILES backup
The problem is that each "system object" on our Win2K pro machines actually
consists of over 1500 files, which are backed up every incremental, although
they never change; which means the full set expires every day, although they
never change. Not a problem for 2-3 servers; but multiply that by the 200
Win2K machines we have converted so far --- and I need HOURS a day of
additional EXPIRE INVENTORY time.
I will send you a copy of the original post.
-----Original Message-----
From: David Longo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 11:43 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Which version of TSM Win32 to install - 4.1.2.12, 14, 17,18
??
Wanda, I don't like surprises on computers. Don't keep us in suspense, what
does it do to our TSM database??
David Longo
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/21/01 11:37AM >>>
The good news: I've heard that multiple versions of SYSTEM OBJECT will be
supported in a client release this year.
The bad news: Wait until you see what that does to your TSM data base!
-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne T. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 11:14 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Which version of TSM Win32 to install - 4.1.2.12, 14, 17,
18 ??
Oops ... you missed 19. :-)
> Which version should we use for the Win32 client? The Tivoli support
> site once showed 4.1.2.12 / 14 / 17 and 18 ! Now it has only 4.1.2.12 !
Perhaps you are confusing the "maintenance" area of the FTP server
with the "patches" area? The patches area has all of these; the
maintenance area has only 12. Since a patch level doesn't normally
make it to the maintenance area, we appear to be in particularly
strange and distressing times.
> We connot upgrade every month or so, it is therefore important to all of
> us to get stabilized versions.
I agree. I wish Tivoli had a commitment to do this.
The availability of patches that correct problems is good, but it has
been several months since a maintenance level has been produced,
and, IMHO, *years* since a workable client has been produced for my
environment.
I'll admit to not understanding "system objects" and their backup and
restore, but providing restore of only the most recent registry backup
may eventually make us rethink *SM as one of our backup/recovery
solutions. Oh yea, being apparently unable to *backup* system
objects to the most recent and supported *SM VM server is even
worse.
Sorry for being such a stick-in-the-mud,
Wayne T. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ADSM Technical Coordinator - UNET University of Maine System
"MMS <health-first.org>" made the following
annotations on 06/21/01 11:45:24
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
This message is for the named person's use only. It may contain
confidential, proprietary, or legally privileged information. No
confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If
you receive this message in error, please immediately delete it and all
copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it, and notify the
sender. You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute,
print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended
recipient. Health First reserves the right to monitor all e-mail
communications through its networks. Any views or opinions expressed in
this message are solely those of the individual sender, except (1) where the
message states such views or opinions are on behalf of a particular entity;
and (2) the sender is authorized by the entity to give such views or
opinions.
============================================================================
==
