Answer the question
In order to leave comments, you need to log in
Update (reinstall) Windows via RDP
Is it possible to upgrade the OS from Windows Server 2008 to Windows Server 2008 R2 without having physical access (even without a remote KVM), i.e. only over RDP?
PS Could the minuser justify his minus? Is this such a stupid question?
Answer the question
In order to leave comments, you need to log in
Theoretically, you can upgrade via unattended install, see for example
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc732825%28v=ws.10%29.aspx
but the risk is quite high, at least you should rollback the script repeatedly in virtuals.
Keep in mind that you can only upgrade from a 64-bit version to the same edition and the same language version.
As I understand it, Windows Server 2008 and 2008 R2 have different licenses and it is not possible to upgrade without purchasing a license.
In general, RDP should be enough to update, run the update installer, wait, reboot the server - and you're done, the server is without a license ...
You can say without trying it yourself - it's dangerous, but 2003 was updated from the enterprise standard for RDP. In addition, there was a reinstallation of the standard for the RDP standard.
In theory, 2008, if reinstalling in update mode, MUST also go painlessly.
Is it physics or virtual? is it possible to put a WDS server nearby and load this machine over the network?
I didn't check it myself, but maybe it's worth digging en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_Center_Configuration_Manager
This is a really stupid question. Even if you do not find fault with terminology issues.
The person who writes “95 does not update to 98? 2000 not updated on XP? XP on Vista? Vista on 7"? it is assumed that he knows what the kernel of the system, the bootloader is. And above - "by RDP".
How do you imagine updating the kernel from the inside?
Probably all the same, you need some kind of media, disk, network storage from which the boot is performed at which the above-mentioned upgrade is carried out?
PS I remind you that 98 patch was not set to 95, etc.
Didn't find what you were looking for?
Ask your questionAsk a Question
731 491 924 answers to any question