Trying install sp3 says sp1 is needed (HP NAS 1500)

[Jon_McGugan]

Searched but failed to find anything but it may be somewhere.
On an HP NAS 1500 trying to install sp3 but it says I need to install sp1 first (which I did some time ago). This is a Windows 2003 server appliance edition. I am logged in locally as administrtor.

[Gene_Comer]

Sounds the same/similar as my problem:

http://forums.veritas.com/discussions/thread.jspa?threadID=52048&tstart=0

Do you have SP1 installed for Windows (I assume the appliance edition uses the same updates as normal windows)?

[Jon_McGugan]

> Searched but failed to find anything but it may be
> somewhere.
> On an HP NAS 1500 trying to install sp3 but it says I
> need to install sp1 first (which I did some time
> ago). This is a Windows 2003 server appliance
> edition. I am logged in locally as administrtor.

When I first installed Backuop Exec I had a lot of problems because the server was the appliance edition so didn't know if your question was exactly the same as you didn't say which spcific OS you were using. If you, or anybody, knows if you can decompose the file to it's components then that may be a solution (it was with the original install.

[Jon_McGugan]

Forgot to answer your original question. No sp1 not installed, it was a nightmare on an appliance Win 2003 server OS. I think HP have sorted that out now.

[Gene_Comer]

> When I first installed Backuop Exec I had a lot of
> problems because the server was the appliance edition
> so didn't know if your question was exactly the same
> as you didn't say which spcific OS you were using. If
> you, or anybody, knows if you can decompose the file
> to it's components then that may be a solution (it
> was with the original install.

Our server is just basic Windows 2003 Standard Edition running on Dell hardware. I had verified the OS was fully patched before I tried applying the SP3 file to Backup Exec.

Like with your machine, SP1 for Backup Exec had been installed some time ago, along with most other patches/updates.

[Shyam_Sundar]

Hello,

Please perform a repair installation of Backup Exec 10.0 and then try to install the SP3. For repair installation please refer to the link below :

http://support.veritas.com/docs/253199

Please write to us about the status of the issue.

Note : If we do not receive your reply within two business days, this post would be marked ‘assumed answered’ and would be moved to ‘answered questions’ pool.


Thanks.

[Jon_McGugan]

Did the repair option but on my 9.1 version. The repair was ok but when I try to install sp3 it still says it wants sp1 installed first.

> Hello,
>
> Please perform a repair installation of Backup Exec
> 10.0 and then try to install the SP3. For repair
> installation please refer to the link below :
>
> http://support.veritas.com/docs/253199
>
> Please write to us about the status of the issue.
>
> Note : If we do not receive your reply within two
> business days, this post would be marked ‘assumed
> answered’ and would be moved to ‘answered questions’
> pool.
>
>
> Thanks.

[tejashree_Bhate]

Hello,

Please install SP2 and then SP3

(TITRE) VERITAS Backup Exec (tm) 9.1 for Windows Servers revision 4691 - Service Pack 2

http://support.veritas.com/docs/275247

Note : If we do not receive your reply within two business days, this post would be marked ‘assumed answered’ and would be moved to ‘answered questions’ pool.


Thanks.

[Alan_Foley]

John,
In another thread there were people having a similar issue, a Veritas tech mentioned an "unpublished document" that said to open the BE program, select the Tools option, scroll down to Serial numbers and Installation option, which starts the MSI installer, when it finally launches, cancel out of it the try the Service patch. It suppossedly worked for several people.

[Nick_Whittome]

I was having a simular issue, and only managed to get it working by totally removing Veritas 9.1 rebooting, then reinstalling 9.1, SP2, then SP3.

Oh Veritas, this is not the first time we have had issues with your patching process. I think your developers need to take a step back and look at the coding behind it. IMHO of course :)


Cheers,

Nick Whittome

[Jon_McGugan]

Have tried this and Alan's suggestion above but neither has worked. Just get message saying I need to install sp1.

> I was having a simular issue, and only managed to get
> it working by totally removing Veritas 9.1 rebooting,
> then reinstalling 9.1, SP2, then SP3.
>
> Oh Veritas, this is not the first time we have had
> issues with your patching process. I think your
> developers need to take a step back and look at the
> coding behind it. IMHO of course :)
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Nick Whittome

[Jon_McGugan]

Forgot to say also tried tejashree Bhate's idea of installing sp2 first but it justs says I need sp1 first. Just in case does sp1 exist anywher?

> Have tried this and Alan's suggestion above but
> neither has worked. Just get message saying I need to
> install sp1.
>
> > I was having a simular issue, and only managed to
> get
> > it working by totally removing Veritas 9.1
> rebooting,
> > then reinstalling 9.1, SP2, then SP3.
> >
> > Oh Veritas, this is not the first time we have had
> > issues with your patching process. I think your
> > developers need to take a step back and look at
> the
> > coding behind it. IMHO of course :)
> >
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Nick Whittome

[Mick_Cranston]

I have the same problem on 4 servers. All are Dell PCs with Adaptec cards, and Exabyte EZ17 tape VXA-2 tapechangers. BE 9.1, Service Pack 2. They are kept up to date with MS Windows patches, and BE patches.

I have tried the installation repair. I have tried starting the install program and cancelling. I have tried unregistering and reregistering msiexec.

My bkupinst.log shows this -

08-22-2005,12:55:30 : Executing CheckPatchDependencies_MSI.
08-22-2005,12:55:30 : Executing CheckPatchDependencies.
08-22-2005,12:55:30 : Executing GetProductGuid.
08-22-2005,12:55:30 : Executing GetInstalledPatches.
08-22-2005,12:55:30 : Executing GetDependentPatches.
08-22-2005,12:55:30 : Executing CheckForDependencies.
08-22-2005,12:55:30 : Executing DisplayPatchDependencies.
08-22-2005,12:55:30 : Executing GetDisplayName.
08-22-2005,13:11:17 : The following patches need to be installed before this patch can successfully continue.

Be4691Rsp1.exe

I really don't want to uninstall and re-install BE 9.1, since I have some rather complex backup jobs.

[Jon_McGugan]

Given the large number of viewings I suggest this is a problem that Veritas are sticking their head in the sand about. I do not want to re-install the whole thing either.

> I have the same problem on 4 servers. All are Dell
> PCs with Adaptec cards, and Exabyte EZ17 tape VXA-2
> tapechangers. BE 9.1, Service Pack 2. They are kept
> up to date with MS Windows patches, and BE patches.
>
> I have tried the installation repair. I have tried
> starting the install program and cancelling. I have
> tried unregistering and reregistering msiexec.
>
> My bkupinst.log shows this -
>
> 08-22-2005,12:55:30 : Executing
> CheckPatchDependencies_MSI.
> 08-22-2005,12:55:30 : Executing
> CheckPatchDependencies.
> 08-22-2005,12:55:30 : Executing GetProductGuid.
> 08-22-2005,12:55:30 : Executing
> GetInstalledPatches.
> 08-22-2005,12:55:30 : Executing
> GetDependentPatches.
> 08-22-2005,12:55:30 : Executing
> CheckForDependencies.
> 08-22-2005,12:55:30 : Executing
> DisplayPatchDependencies.
> 08-22-2005,12:55:30 : Executing GetDisplayName.
> 08-22-2005,13:11:17 : The following patches need to
> be installed before this patch can successfully
> continue.
>
> Be4691Rsp1.exe
>
> I really don't want to uninstall and re-install BE
> 9.1, since I have some rather complex backup jobs.

[Gene_Comer]

> Given the large number of viewings I suggest this is
> a problem that Veritas are sticking their head in the
> sand about. I do not want to re-install the whole
> thing either.
>

At this point, I would have to agree with you. And I also don't want to have to reinstall to solve this. I'm just waiting for them to suggest "upgrading" to the newer version.

How long has it been since Symantec took over Veritas?

If I have to remove/reinstall, I might as well move to another package which has better support.

[Edgardo_Diaz]

I'm sick of this. Veritas seems to think that is OK to release untested software and hope that everything will be just fine. Over the last year I have had about 10 open support requests, anything from the XML log viewer not working to been unable to install their patches. I too have a problem trying to instal SP3 on our Win 2000 Pro machine with Backup Exec 9.1. We just upgraded from 8.6 to 9.1 less than a year ago and two weeks later they released 10.0. In the last year we have had 50% of our backups fail. For been the "Best" it sure is a piece of crap. I think I will contact Iomega and see if they have any plans on taking some of Veritas market since they are already use Ghost with their REV drives to perform backups of local computers. I'm sure Symantec will not be very happy if they do, but competition would be great for us the consumers. I will not pay another $1,000 to upgrade to another yet untested piece of crap. You guys should checkout Verita's Panther Beta release which they are looking for Beta testers, but get this, you only have 60 days to test. Unfortunately Symantec will start to get the bad reputation that Veritas has successfully made for itself.

[Amruta_Purandar]

Hello,

Please try rebooting the server and then try the installation again and verify the results.

NOTE : If we do not receive your reply within two business days, this post would be marked assumed answered and would be moved to answered questions pool.

[Jon_McGugan]

Have rebooted server. Still get message saying I need to install sp1. Why do you appear to be clutching at straws and wasting my time (and everyone elses)? This has been dragging on a long time and many other people have same problem but you (veritas) appear to have done nothing to solve problem.

> Hello,
>
> Please try rebooting the server and then try the
> installation again and verify the results.
>
> NOTE : If we do not receive your reply within two
> business days, this post would be marked assumed
> answered and would be moved to answered
> questions pool.

[Alan_Foley]

Would it be to much to ask that the Veritas support folks simply put SP1 back on the downloads page so it would be available. Since not having very much luck really arriving at a fix, try the simple answer and make the patch available again.

[Gene_Comer]

> Would it be to much to ask that the Veritas support
> folks simply put SP1 back on the downloads page so it
> would be available. Since not having very much luck
> really arriving at a fix, try the simple answer and
> make the patch available again.

I'm not sure that would help matters any, at least it didn't with us. We still had a copy of it from where we installed it originally, and that was one of the first things I tried, since we did have it.

Care to guess what happens when we attempt to install SP1? Yep, it bombs with the error:

"The following patches need to be installed before this patch can successfully continue.

Be4691sp1.exe"