after the update to MA 126.96.36.19918 our SuperAgent Reposiories doesn't work.
The error is 10061. Unable to connect.
With the previous version everything is alright.
PS: Logs are available when i am back at work.on 02.08.12 06:44:16 CDT
We are seeing the same issue over here. I ended up rolling back the superagents to Patch 1 for the time being.
There is some sort of unhandled exception in the framework service on the superagent that causes the service to stop and unfortunately I rolled back before I thought to grab a copy of the log.
Getting exactly the same here, very very unimpressed. This is the first time I've ever had a problem deploying the agent itself and unsure how to play it.
Which log will tell me whats gone wrong with the update?
I've now got a ticket open with support about this, and will pass on anything useful I hear about it. For now, I've set up a tag in ePO to stop deployment to superagents and rolled them back to patch 1.
On Server 2008 R2/Win 7 the logs are in: C:\ProgramData\McAfee\Common Framework\DB. The Agent log shows the unhandled exception, and you will probably have an error in the windows application log as well.
When rolling back can I just check 4.6 P1 version back into EPO and it will install over the messed up 4.6 P2?
Im very annoyed at this happening with something that has supposedly been tested...... and at a time when Im trying to justify the cost of our McAfee products to the business this happens to give them ammunition against it.
My temporary solution was to check P1 in previous, tag the repository server and the P2 is rollout just on clients and server without this tag.
Then select the reposerver and install P1 over existing installation.Nachricht geändert durch Schnuecks on 04.08.12 04:07:26 CDT
@mjd77 Did you ever hear back from McAfee support on this? For some reason now that I have rolled back the agent on the repository servers, they are being disabled everynight in my McAfee Agent > Repository policies. Very frustrating.
I'm still waiting on McAfee Support to provide a solution other than "roll back the agents".
They appear to have published a KB article about the issue at: