Creating an application with more than one deployment type

[Amar]

I have been trying to create an application with more than one deployment type. If create it with 5 deployment type only the first one installs if I create it with two ony the first one installs.

 

I can create single applications with single deployment type and deploy then to an OSD without any issue.

 

I am new to this - can anyone tell me where I am going wrong.

 

Please see attached DOC

[BB24]

Amar, Please clarify what are you are asking. When you say "single application" are you saying a "package". When you are saying "deployment type" are you suggesting variant installations of the package?

 

For example, your application actually contains a suite of sub applications. You want to be able to call within your OSD different types of installation based on some variable (like notebook systems get these applications, while kiosks get a different set).

 

If this is true, you could do it a number of ways within the Task Sequence with task sequence variables and using different programs within the package itself.

 

Eg.

Task Sequence Variable = zTS_Application_Suite_Selection

Package = Application_Suite

Program_for_Application_Suite_Full_Install = Full_install.bat

SubProgramA for Application_Suite_Install = SubProgramA.bat

SubProgramB for Application_Suite_Install = SubProgramB.bat

 

Task Sequence step

Install Full Suite Check

If zTS_Application_Suite_Selection = Program_for_Application_Suite_Full_Install then Run Program Full_Install.bat else Ignore Error go to next step.

 

Install SubProgramA Suite Check

If zTS_Application_Suite_Selection = SubProgramA for Application_Suite_Install then Run Program SubProgramA.bat else Ignore Error go to next step.

 

Install SubProgramB Suite Check

If zTS_Application_Suite_Selection = SubProgramB for Application_Suite_Install then Run Program SubProgramB.bat else Ignore Error go to next step.

 

There are much cleaner ways to do this of course, this is just to help me understand what you are asking. I couldn't find the link to your document.

[Peter van der Woude]

The idea behind it is that the different Types are meant for different scenario's and not for multiple things running after eachother.

[BB24]

Thanks Peter. I wasn't paying attention to the thread heading and forgot this was for SCCM 2012.

[spgsitsupport]

How seriously counter intuitive that is!

 

Things that could be simple now require many additional steps.

 

Scenario: run a file from cccache (that gets downloaded from DP), which all it does is service install (copies itself to syswow64), THEN I need to copy the service executable from syswow64 to system32 (please do not comment on the action or wonder why - simply that how it needs to be!)

 

So it should be an easy -

 

action 1 = run file (depended on)

action 2 = copy file (deployed)

 

Now I need to create 2 applications (figuring what kind of logical names to use), make one depend on the other & then deploy the last one to the user/workstation

 

At which point the application that deployed application depends on gets installed with exist code 0 (action 1 success), but the 1st application is ignored (action 2 - no single mention of it in AppEnforce.log) and user gets Failed

 

Seb

[HotdogSCCM]

That's why Packages still exist. Applications were not a replace-all, they're an addition to, Packages.

 

what you outline is completely doable via Packages; don't view Apps as "the only thing", just "another thing".

 

Every company I've been at, people either:

 

1) Don't use Apps at all, cause confusing and stuff.

or

2) Never use Packages, because Applications now exist.

 

Embrace them both.

[spgsitsupport]

Easy to say, but honestly if you have technicians that are supposed to ie produce/maintain "something" creation for software distribution, then it does make it REALLY CONFUSING which one to use for what purpose.

 

So it does end up with all being made into one or the other (could be right or wrong), as it is too logically time consuming to figure out which one could/should be right for the situation.

 

Mess IMO

 

Seb

[NickolajA]

The whole idea with DeploymentTypes are to make sure they run based on different requirements, targeting various scenarios e.g. an installation method for App-V if the device is not the Primary Device for the user etc. If you need to chain something, you can work with dependencies instead.