IT-DISCUSS Archives

January 2006

IT-DISCUSS@LIST.UVM.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"J. Greg Mackinnon" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Technology Discussion at UVM <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 12 Jan 2006 16:52:32 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (52 lines)
You should not need to uninstall SAV 9.  I believe it was Stef who 
suggested that uninstalling SAV 9 first was the "safe" approach.  I 
think she is right, in that you are less likely to have problems if you 
manually uninstall SAV 9.  That being said, this is exactly what the SAV 
10 installer tries to do: uninstalls v9, then install v10. 

Often, the system on which SAV 9 has been installed become damaged in 
some subtle way, then SAV 9 refuses to uninstall during the SAV 10 
upgrade process.  This also is not necessarily a bug in the SAV 10 
installer, but more likely caused by damage to the existing SAV 9 
install.  Fortunately, there is help available!  When you run into 
problems with a SAV installation, you can try "NoNAV" (for botched SAV 9 
installations) or "SCSCleanWipe" (for botched SAV 9 and 10 
installations).  Once you have blasted v9, you can then take a stab at v10.

You can get these tools locally in the following locations:
https://www.uvm.edu/software/distribution/windows/antivirus/NoNav.exe
https://www.uvm.edu/software/distribution/windows/antivirus/SCSCleanWipe.exe

NoNav is very reliable for SAV 9 installs.  It WILL NOT work on SAV 10.  
I believe it was developed by a rival AV software company to help 
clients "get out of the Symantec trap".

SCSCleanWipe is an official Symantec tool.  I find it to be very 
effective, but have had it behave strangely on one or two occasions. . 

-Greg

Alison Pechenick wrote:
> Thanks for this, Greg.
>
> Could you please clarify whether or not we should be uninstalling Sav 
> 9 first?  I saw the "delete, then install" at the top of an earlier 
> e-mail; someone else I spoke to mentioned that there's a "no need to 
> uninstall" written somewhere in the install notes (I didn't check for 
> myself, sorry).
>
> Regards,
>
> Alison
>
>
>
> J. Greg Mackinnon wrote:
>> Larry et-al:
>>
>> As Stef posted earlier today, the SAV servers are pushing a policy 
>> set other than the one we initially intended.  As a result, the 
>> installation script that I wrote is unable to shutdown the running 
>> SAV 10 instance long enough to patch to version 10.0.2.2001.  
>> Annoying, but not exactly a true bug in the install script...

ATOM RSS1 RSS2