Hi, I have an annoying problem with my SCCM 2007 clients. All of them (150 in all) have been deployed, but on almost all of them I can't initiate any acrtion of the actions listed in the "Actions" tab . With fully operative clients I can deploy everything : Software Updates , Advertisments ETC . I uninstalled manually (ccmsetup /uninstall) on numerous clients then manualy installed (ccmsetup) and the clients worked for about 2 advertisments the "shut up " and could not initiate any action , resoving with Workstations that can't get any deployment whatsoever. What could be causing this annoying problem? I fix a client setup , everythings ok then a day later nothing works... Thanks Ryan

but on almost all of them I can't initiate any acrtion of the actions listed in the "Actions" tab Why not? Any error message?Torsten Meringer | http://www.mssccmfaq.de

Hi Torsten. Execpt "Could not initiate action" when i select any action - no. which log should i go through?

Hi, the client is not working correctly. Check the ccmexec.log for errors.Kent Agerlund | My blogs: http://blog.coretech.dk/author/kea/ and http://scug.dk/ | Twitter @Agerlund | Linkedin: /kentagerlund

Here is a portion from the CCMEXEC log (there are not more entries after that) ><time="08:56:35.109+-120" date="02-21-2011" component="CCMEXEC" context="" type="1" thread="252" file="messagequeue_base.cpp:205"> <![LOG[Initialized queue processor 'mp_[http]mp_policymanager' Enabled=true Concurrency=1]LOG]!><time="08:56:35.109+-120" date="02-21-2011" component="CCMEXEC" context="" type="1" thread="252" file="messagequeueproc_base.cpp:258"> <![LOG[Registering built-in COM class objects.]LOG]!><time="08:56:35.109+-120" date="02-21-2011" component="CCMEXEC" context="" type="1" thread="252" file="init.cpp:993"> <![LOG[Registering hosted COM class objects.]LOG]!><time="08:56:35.156+-120" date="02-21-2011" component="CCMEXEC" context="" type="1" thread="252" file="init.cpp:998"> <![LOG[Error registering hosted class '{E67DBF56-96CA-4e11-83A5-5DEC8BD02EA8}'. Code 0x80040154]LOG]!><time="08:56:35.171+-120" date="02-21-2011" component="CCMEXEC" context="" type="3" thread="252" file="wmisettings.cpp:84"> <![LOG[Allowing activation requests on class objects.]LOG]!><time="08:56:36.984+-120" date="02-21-2011" component="CCMEXEC" context="" type="1" thread="252" file="init.cpp:1001"> <![LOG[Error calling CoResumeClassObjects.]LOG]!><time="08:56:37.000+-120" date="02-21-2011" component="CCMEXEC" context="" type="3" thread="252" file="init.cpp:1005"> <![LOG[Phase 1 initialization failed (0x80004015).]LOG]!><time="08:56:37.000+-120" date="02-21-2011" component="CCMEXEC" context="" type="3" thread="252" file="init.cpp:1158"> <![LOG[Phase 1 initialization failed (0x80004015).]LOG]!><time="08:56:37.000+-120" date="02-21-2011" component="CCMEXEC" context="" type="3" thread="252" file="entrypoint.cpp:2085">

See if the "SMS Agent Host" (ccmexec) service is still running.Torsten Meringer | http://www.mssccmfaq.de

Hi, Has there been any change in the client machine (new service Pack, new antivirus software version, ...) after the client deployment ?? And have you tried to exclude the ccmexec.exe from the real time scan of the AV (I've seen the same problem with symantec AV and other AV softwares).Bechir Gharbi | http://myitforum.com/cs2/blogs/bgharbi/

Hi, yes it is working.

In addition, also pleas confirm that no bad AD GPOs running against these systems which may cause the problem, addition to that also confirm that WMI is not throwing any error and "COM+ Event System" service running.Joy, Please remember to click Mark as Answer on the post that helps you, and to click Unmark as Answer if a marked post does not actually answer your question. This can be beneficial to other community members reading the thread.

Hi Bechir, No there has not. the client seems to stop working after a deployent or two from sccm. I havn' t checked the AV yet (We have ESET ). even if that is the problem , I cannot disable the realtime protection for long..

I cannot disable the realtime protection for long.. I never said "disable the real time protection", but I said "exclude the ccmexec.exe from the real time scan of the AV".Bechir Gharbi | http://myitforum.com/cs2/blogs/bgharbi/

hi, COM+ event system is set to manual but the service does start . I'm just getting DCOM launch permissions events which I get even if the client is communicating with sccm and getting deployed.

BTW ... This dosn't happen on Windows 7 Machines

In addition, also pleas confirm that no bad AD GPOs running against these systems which may cause the problem, addition to that also confirm that WMI is not throwing any error and "COM+ Event System" service running. Joy, Please remember to click “Mark as Answer” on the post that helps you, and to click “Unmark as Answer” if a marked post does not actually answer your question. This can be beneficial to other community members reading the thread. I just noticed that when I restart a working client , it stops working after the restart. another indication is that on the "Advanced" tab on the client the chache on the "temporary download folder" indicates 0. Maybe there is a conflicting policy setting..

Hi, Have you upgrade your client machines to Windows XP Service Pack 2 (SP2) ? Or Group Policy object is configured to set the SMS Agent Host service (CcmExec.exe) startup mode to Automatic ? If yes, then pelase reffer the below link ? http://support.microsoft.com/kb/919592 Thanks, Amarpal Singh Sandhu

I think you are running with win 7...... As I said earlier please confirm that no bad AD GPOs running against these systems also please check if any start-up script which may cause the problem, addition to that also confirm that WMI is not throwing any error Joy, Please remember to click “Mark as Answer” on the post that helps you, and to click “Unmark as Answer” if a marked post does not actually answer your question. This can be beneficial to other community members reading the thread.

I think you are running with win 7...... As I said earlier please confirm that no bad AD GPOs running against these systems also please check if any start-up script which may cause the problem, addition to that also confirm that WMI is not throwing any error Joy, Please remember to click “Mark as Answer” on the post that helps you, and to click “Unmark as Answer” if a marked post does not actually answer your question. This can be beneficial to other community members reading the thread.

Hi, Have you upgrade your client machines to Windows XP Service Pack 2 (SP2) ? Or Group Policy object is configured to set the SMS Agent Host service (CcmExec.exe) startup mode to Automatic ? If yes, then pelase reffer the below link ? http://support.microsoft.com/kb/919592 Thanks, Amarpal Singh Sath thanks Amarpai for your answer Both are true. DC is 2008 so the location of the SMS agent host is a bit different .. but ... YES the setting is automatic. Thanks for the link to the KB. I'll undefine the GPO respective setting and let you know Ryan

Hi, Have you upgrade your client machines to Windows XP Service Pack 2 (SP2) ? Or Group Policy object is configured to set the SMS Agent Host service (CcmExec.exe) startup mode to Automatic ? If yes, then pelase reffer the below link ? http://support.microsoft.com/kb/919592 Thanks, Amarpal Singh Sandhu Thanks . Apparently the sms host setting was defined. It must have been "inherited" from the previous sms2003 settings. All advenced clients have been uninstalled and installed again and stay working.

Hi, Have you upgrade your client machines to Windows XP Service Pack 2 (SP2) ? Or Group Policy object is configured to set the SMS Agent Host service (CcmExec.exe) startup mode to Automatic ? If yes, then pelase reffer the below link ? http://support.microsoft.com/kb/919592 Thanks, Amarpal Singh Sandhu This was the answer in our SCCM 2012 environment as seen in the linked article, even though the article refers to SMS 2003 and SCCM 2007. However, not all the exact same symptoms were seen, (i.e. - The SMSCLIUI.log on the server did not have the entries the article suggested it would.) The client log errors were the same as seen in the linked article.