On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Andrea Pescetti <pesce...@apache.org> wrote: > On 10/01/2013 Hagar Delest wrote: >> >> Le 10/01/2013 13:57, Rob Weir a écrit : >>> >>> If we have not figured out exactly what causes the current OOo 3.3.0 >>> -> AOO 3.4.x profile migration problems, how are we certain that these >>> problems will not come back when we migrate AOO 4.0 to AOO 4.1 ??? > > > Between 3.3.1 and 3.4.1 we changed (twice) the way the profile is stored, > first removing a dependency on BerkeleyDB and then reducing the profile size > by not putting a copy of shared extensions there. If we don't do > incompatible changes again, we remove this type of risks. >
Is it technically possible to move to a text-based profile, maybe something in XML format? Or must it be binary? If we could use a text-based profile then it would be easier to support users. If something goes wrong it would be easier to debug, and easier to fix. It would also be good for admins, since they could then push out profile changes to their users. -Rob > >> Even a brand new install leads to profile corruption rather quickly >> (especially under XP). > > > I've seen it happen when one tries to keep both 3.3 and 3.4 installed, with > a "setup /a" for example. The two, unless he takes care of customizing it in > the INI files, will try to use the same profile folder. The first run of 3.4 > will convert it to the 3.4 format, then if you run 3.3 again you will break > it. This is of course an unsupported configuration, but it might explain why > people who see 3.4.1 working smoothly suddenly find it broken. I'm not > implying that this covers all the cases you report, but it could be > responsible for a part of them. > > Regards, > Andrea.
