Blogs from TMurgent
Well here was a wasted hour trying to figure this one out. It should have been so easy!
Problem: Installed a lab App-V 5 Management/Publishing Server with default instance database on that server. Works great. Install second Management/Publishing server needing to use the remote database. Fails.
What could have been the problem: (but wasn’t)
Tim Mangan
TMurgent Technologies, LLP
September 22, 2014
Related Product: App-V 5.0 SP2 HF5 and prior
When we created the original application virtualization product, SoftGrid, streaming was a very important part of the implementation. Over the years, the streaming aspect has become less important to implementations, while remaining important to the decision makers that …
Maybe Steve Thomas isn’t as crazy as he looks? I thought he went a little nuts when he wrote this blog post and suggested that you should always sequence using VFS. I mean, that is dead set against everything Microsoft has ever said. I did not disagree with the idea of VFS’ing things, but I have never said to VFS …
A customer was using XenApp with PVS. The same PVS image was used on machines on a farm. They added App-V 5 to the PVS image and decided to use the PowerShell interface to add applications virtually at boot time. One of the servers refused every app, while everything else worked on the ‘identical’ servers.
Investigation showed that the Add …
Here is the scenario.
I had my Windows 8 x64 desktop with App-V 5.0 SP2 installed and had added Hotfix 5. All was well.
I upgraded to Windows 8.1. Current packages continued working fine. Decided to add another package. I received error C8007005 on Add-AppVClientPackage. After researching and trying some things, I eventually tried an old package that worked elsewhere …
| Please see updates to this post HERE. |
The stars had aligned! I had finished all of the testing for The Deployment Performance Series research, published the first of the 8 papers, shipped my server down to North Carolina for our next training class. And great summer weather was set for a great week of golf. Then my knee acted …
Here is my explanation: Someone at Microsoft has been taking lessons on how to name product releases from Citrix. There really can be no other explanation for App-V 5.0 Service Pack 2 Hotfix 4. It is full of features. I mean, why not call it release 5.1 (or 5.3)? Or maybe Service pack 3? Surely they know how to build …
In writing some apps for some APP-V 5 performance testing, I stumbled on a problem that was at least new to me.
I know that in App-V 5 the client will only run Virtual Services under the Local System account. But I didn’t know that it totally ignored the others, I thought it captured them and just changed the account. …