Posted on 04-26-2017 02:43 PM
I've set a custom trigger with execution frequency as Ongoing.
On the first initial run, it'll work properly. If I try to run it again on the same machine, it'll say "no policies were found for the "xxxxxxx" trigger.
I've tried flushing the log and re-running to no avail.
If I edit the policy that contains the custom trigger, and save it exactly as is, it'll work when I re-run the policy.
Posted on 04-27-2017 09:42 AM
Did you figure this out? What is the scope on the policy?
Posted on 04-27-2017 09:45 AM
Never figured it out. Will try testing again today.
Scope on policy is All Computers with no exclusions. No server or client side limitations.
Posted on 08-01-2017 04:10 AM
Has anyone figured this one out??
Having the same isssue :-(
Posted on 08-01-2017 05:50 AM
@kerouak Have you tried a Target of Specific Computers -> All Managed Clients rather than All Computers?
Posted on 08-01-2017 06:25 AM
@kerouak / @sdagley I'm seeing similar behavior with 9.99. Policy scoped to a single computer, set to ongoing. The policy calls a script, that's it, and if I run it once and try to run it again later, "No policies found". There is no trigger set on the policy, as I am calling it using the ID (jamf policy -id <idnum>
). If I delete the computer and re-add, the policy runs fine.
I'll do some more testing today or tomorrow and if necessary I'll open a ticket with support. Anyone else opened a ticket on this?
Posted on 08-01-2017 06:46 AM
@stevewood Out of curiosity, have you tried triggering via a Custom trigger instead of by ID to see if that behaves differently?
Posted on 08-01-2017 10:34 AM
@sdagley no, not yet. It's a VM I was using for testing something in dev and it wasn't a big deal to remove the system. If I get some time this afternoon I'll test.
Posted on 08-02-2017 03:53 AM
I was calling it via a custom trigger and had the issue..
Posted on 08-02-2017 03:54 AM
@sdagley good shout!!
I'll give that a go..
Ta
Posted on 08-02-2017 04:52 AM
@stevewood Yup, Remove and re add works for me too, however, it's a bit annoying ;-)