Endpoint Protection

Expand all | Collapse all

anyone already installed RU3 ?

  • 1.  anyone already installed RU3 ?

    Posted 25 days ago
    did anyone already dare to install RU3 from MP1?
    Is the RU3 upgrade install more polished than RU2 (that was riddle with certificate/database defects/misc)?

    thanks


  • 2.  RE: anyone already installed RU3 ?

    Posted 25 days ago

    Yup, two days ago.

    Deployed to one server and selected group of workstations (W7/W10, laptop/desktop combo). No problems, everything went well.

    The only issue I've seen is in SEPM, Install Packages -> RU2 (4615.2000) WIN64BIT package got deleted. The rest of RU2 packages seem intact. I tried (re)adding WIN64 install package afterwards, after I've noticed this. Just in case. Package appeared in the SEPM alright, but was deleted again after a while?! But, as I'm most likely going to move all the rest of the client groups to RU3 in a couple of days anyway, I'm not bothered (much) with this.

    Besides that, nothing negative to report.




  • 3.  RE: anyone already installed RU3 ?

    Posted 19 days ago
    Went to from MP1 to RU3 without, so far, problems.
    The RU3 installers now does some prechecks before messing things up (ie digital certificate expiration).

    In my case cert was expired (but MP1 was working just fine) so I had to switch all the SEPM<->SEP connection to unauthenticated http (to avoid losing the connection), renewed the certificate, then installed RU3.


  • 4.  RE: anyone already installed RU3 ?

    Posted 18 days ago
    Upgraded two of our four SEPM from RU1 MP1 to RU3 without issues so far.


  • 5.  RE: anyone already installed RU3 ?

    Posted 19 days ago
    Edited by msnslag 19 days ago

    No problems during upgrade from SEP 14.3 RU2 to SEP 14.3 RU3.

    However, after the upgrade under "Clients" there is a mix-up of Computer names and User names, which we hope will be fixed soon
    as it makes the "Clients"-part more or less unusable.





  • 6.  RE: anyone already installed RU3 ?

    Posted 20 days ago
    The RU2 (4615.2000) package gets deleted by the RU2 Patch 1 ,  do you have package 4637.2000 ?


  • 7.  RE: anyone already installed RU3 ?

    Posted 24 days ago
    thanks for the feedback.


  • 8.  RE: anyone already installed RU3 ?

    Posted 23 days ago
    Well, I tried to u/g our 14RU2 to 14RU3 - and it failed. The console u/g went fine then the dBase got to 100% and then 'error occurred' (see pics)

    This is a VM which had a clean install of 14RU2 last year because ... the u/g failed and support could not help.. I like the product when it works but really feel it's time to look for a replacement for our sites.  Sigh..

    Thank goodness for VM & snapshots - easy to get back to stability!!


  • 9.  RE: anyone already installed RU3 ?

    Posted 19 days ago
      |   view attached
    upgrade fail from 14.3 RU2 to RU3


  • 10.  RE: anyone already installed RU3 ?

    Posted 19 days ago
    >do you have package 4637.2000?

    In my case, no. Haven't even seen that build.
    We went from RU2 (4615.2000) to RU3 (5413.3000) and only WIN64BIT RU2 package got deleted.


  • 11.  RE: anyone already installed RU3 ?

    Posted 19 days ago
    We are also seeing the computer names and user names mixed up after upgrading to SEP 14.3 RU3


  • 12.  RE: anyone already installed RU3 ?

    Broadcom Employee
    Posted 18 days ago
    For user names and computer names being mixed up after the upgrade please open a case.

    ------------------------------
    John Owens
    Strategic Support Engineer | Symantec Endpoint Security Division (SES)
    Broadcom Software
    ------------------------------



  • 13.  RE: anyone already installed RU3 ?

    Posted 18 days ago
    Edited by mcsldr 18 days ago
    Hey, after getting response from another user, that this is a feature, I investigated a little.

    It appears in the client page when you right click on a client "Switch to user mode" and "switch to computer mode" menu options will reverse this.

    It has to done for each client that is incorrect - which in my case was >5.

    Regards,
    MCSLdr