Re: Creating multiple files from txt data

If you are trying to determine what hotfixes are installed on a Windows PC, using srvinfo or psinfo is perhaps not the best way to go.

Microsoft's MBSA is an excellent (free) patch scanning tool - it can also output an XML report (you can run it from the command line as well as GUI) so if you want you can parse the output and do some post-processing with Perl with XML::Parser say.

I suppose I should weigh in with an off-topic non-Perl answer (as is my way) by saying that if this is for a Corporate environment you should probably take a look at WSUS and/or SMS for Windows patch management.

Comment on Re: Creating multiple files from txt data

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Creating multiple files from txt data by Sunnmann (Acolyte) on Sep 23, 2005 at 18:35 UTC
We have tried the SUS and all that for patching. Problem is ourt firewalls here and the configuration. The IT department has patching systems, but once again our firewalls block us from being able to use those...and they WILL not understand that the systems I am talking about ABSOLUTELY cannot be rebooted ona whim. They run 24/7 and are testing teh whole time...to reboot these machines we have to get time from teh manufacturing floor so they are able to either swap the product around or if it is a quick reboot just stop at end of testing and then reboot quickly. So we have come up with this solution. The main script works fine, I am just trying to make it easier on people to install this by cutting down on the preliminary work. I thank yo ufor your suggestion though and i will see how MSBA will work. I have tried it before, but if I am not able to write a perl script to parse out a simple txt document I dont know how I will write one to parse out an XML file :)	[reply]
Re^3: Creating multiple files from txt data by TStanley (Canon) on Oct 16, 2005 at 00:56 UTC
You would use XML::Parser of course. :-) TStanley -------- The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing -- Edmund Burke	[reply]