Go with green binary options download adobe acrobat pro dc
Adobe must have lost a competent person and hired a newbee to head up the Adobe DC team. Removing the long list of "Like" to avoid confusion, after getting pinged about it.
If it serves as consolation, Adobe is not the only company moving in that same direction. Microsoft is slowly doing the same to Windows and even to their MS Office suite. Adobe just has the lead go with green binary options download adobe acrobat pro dc this confusing versioning scheme. I'm aware that Acrobat now has two different release tracks for updates Classic and Continuous. But I'm assuming you're deploying Go with green binary options download adobe acrobat pro dc across the board.
X or whatever it is they're up to? Hi bpavlov users might be at a higher version than what we are deploying This also future-proofs the scope, so when a newer version comes out we just need to tweak the scope.
We use EAs to differentiate between Continuous and Classic track installs. Whether what we are pushing is go with green binary options download adobe acrobat pro dc update or a full install, the end goal is to get targeted computers to the desired version and track. Those with equal or higher versions will excluded using the above logic.
Been thinking there must be an easier way to do this, using the version string Not sure if this helps at all, have used a similar technique to not overwrite newer versions before. The python script can parse the number natively, so nothing special, just comparing 2 versions. I can understand not wanting to roll anyone backward, but why not just roll everyone forward to be on the same page?
Apparently I don't understand your answer. If you've got people running the multitude of Why make things hard on yourself by tracking What does it matter if someone is running Why not go with green binary options download adobe acrobat pro dc have a single EA that looks for "is not like When Adobe releases an update, then change it go with green binary options download adobe acrobat pro dc "is not like AVmcclint In my environment, all users are admins. Sometimes they will adopt updates before they are vetted by IT.
The goal is to not roll them back with the current tested version. AVmcclint I suspect he wants to setup a base for the software already found on machines. My guess is that 1 his users have admin access and 2 they are not going through their Self Service to install this software.
I do agree that donmontalvo should really be pushing the latest version unless there's a reason he didn't want his users on the latest in which case he should be looking at how to uninstall versions that don't match the one he wants to deploy.
Yeah, admin users being able to install what they want throws wrenches into the works. If you happen to have a more strict environment that doesn't allow anyone go with green binary options download adobe acrobat pro dc be local admin, then you probably don't need to deal with anything like this, but for those of us that aren't in that position, being able to do proper version checking and not rolling someone back to a previous release is important.
The main issue here of course, is the Casper Suite's inability to do real version comparison natively. I do something pretty similar in one of my scripts - splitting the version on the period into 2 arrays and comparing each section to the other to determine which is greater, less than or equal and setting an appropriate flag on exit.
Its the only way short of using python as mentioned to do actual version comparison, since you can't just do something like remove the periods and lump the integers together and compare them. That fails more often that you might think because of developers using very inconsistent versioning schemes.
Ah that would explain it. It always makes my skin crawl when I hear of sites where all users are local admins. I don't want to imagine the management nightmare if dealing with more than a handful of users. Even with the fluid nature of uncontrolled user installs, you've still gotta draw a line somewhere, right? Good luck to you! I think we've gotten a little off-topic from the Adobe version numbers, but since we're here Build it right the first time to minimize problems.
If all my users had admin rights, I'd be spending all my time cleaning up and fixing the things they broke. Since their admin rights would give them the freedom to mess up anything and everything on the computer, this would make troubleshooting a nightmare. Instead, I vet all the software before it gets installed on anyone's Macs. The prime example of why this is usually the best method is the MS Office I have 80 users I manage by myself and if I had to run around to all 80 Macs to uninstall that horrible update, I'd pull my hair out.
Instead, I installed it on my Mac to test and I discovered the show-stopping bug and I only had to uninstall and roll back ONE computer. I waited until the Maybe if your support team has a lot more techs who are Mac-savvy, then maybe you can afford to let the users be on the bleeding edge of updates and don't mind undoing the damage. The worse case scenario for them is they mangle their home folder while the computer stays operational. I warn all of them that they are free to shoot themselves in the foot and so far I've only had one user do that.
We use extension attributes to convert the text into integers so we can use the 'less than' ability of a smart group. When you walk into an environment with times as many Macs as you have, it is fair to expect finding issues that need to be addressed. Folks who have admin rights have security exemptions, but let's get the conversation back on track. Where a patch needs to be deployed, and the software has a wonky versioning scheme, I'm trying to find the most logical way to avoid rolling back someone who might be on a new version.
Which is, well, stupid. Except maybe to the folks who did it, who most likely don't understand enterprise management. I suppose our EAs that are already in place to identify Continuous vs Classic, plus your script, should do the trick.
PS, has anyone kagibson? The issue again is the Track ID is right in the middle of the string. Go with green binary options download adobe acrobat pro dc, but removing periods and doing a straight integer comparison is a bad way to do it.
Oh, you'll get lucky and it will work a few times, giving you a false sense of confidence, but you will quickly run into apps that will blow the whole thing up on you. Here's a simple example. Which is newer, Firefox We as humans can clearly see You are comparing to Which one is larger, aka "newer" now?
Now, you can use a method I've used like padding the shorter string with 0's to match the length of the longer string, like tobut even this will run into problems. I was using that for a little while, and then Lync Once the periods are removed and the shorter string gets padded with a "0" you end up with vswhere See what I mean? No matter how hard you try, some semi-insane product manager or developer somewhere is going to ruin your day by coming up with a version scheme that only makes sense to someone in an asylum who talks to little green men, lol.
The only mostly reliable way is to split the version on the sections and compare each one in a loop. Using that method in the examples above, Firefox That's exactly the concern. I think the assumption being made is that the string is a major. Doesn't Casper allow you to check version numbers against each other on the assumption the version quoted is actually a version?
You could re-order the parts to return some kind of EA. That's not at all ugly! It relies on having strings installed and the Xcode license agreed.
We do this as standard. It therefore go with green binary options download adobe acrobat pro dc relies on the binary not changing significantly enough to get confused results. Could grep -m 1 I guess, still not full proof though. We have been put in touch with the Adobe Acrobat team dev group. Hoping they can at least provide a proper incremental version key in Info. I hope Adobe's DC team gets it and makes the necessary changes to give us proper version strings.
Now we need the Adobe DC team to get up to speed. They acknowledged their KB has bad paths, which don't match what is installed for Classic vs Continuous. They plan to fix in the coming days. I requested adding a "Track" key in Info. They are going to see if that is possible. Just got off a conference call with the Adobe team responsible for the Acrobat and Acrobat Reader products.
They really like sean 's script. Here is their summary email. I would post the text, but it has formatting that needs to be preserved. I just made noise. XXXXX string as a number. Seems reliable, if not a bit convoluted.