Hennes Rohling wrote:
Kay Ramme - Sun Germany - Hamburg wrote:
Stephan,
Stephan Bergmann wrote:
Again: If I have two instances A and B of an application installed,
and want to have a per-installation deployment variable C for that
application stored in the registry, what would the involved registry
keys have to look like for instance A to have C with value D and
instance B to have C with value E?
Good question, somehow the registry keys for A and B have to be
different. Actually I don't know, how this is conceptually solved,
e.g. what is going to happen if I install OOo two times. Probably the
second installation just overwrites the keys of the first, if so, I
think we don't need to solve something which is not solved by Windows
itself.
Anyway, putting some more thoughts into this, I think the perfect
solution would be, to specify the to be used URE in the registry of
the active (the last) installation, comparable to all other registry
entries created for a particular OOo installation. The deployment
parameters than just reference the registry entries, in case someone
wants to change the URE for a particular installation he / she
* may either change the registry entry for the active installation, or
* directly the deployment parameter of a particular installation.
Yes, very good aproach. Again...for a good example of how the registry
keys should look like is to install different version of a JRE.
I'm still not convinced we all talk about the same thing here. There
are three things involved:
1 Installed UREs should advertise their locations, so that clients can
find them. That is (and should be) done by writing into the registry.
(And fits Hennes' analogy with the JRE.)
2 At installation time, OOo-wo-URE needs to find a URE installation it
can use. That should probably be done by reading from the registry the
data written at (1).
3 An OOo-wo-URE installation needs to keep persistent the information
obtained at (2). As discussed, the registry is not a good place for
that (as different OOo-wo-URE installations could interfere by storing
their private data at the same location within the registry). A better
place probably is some data file within the OOo-wo-URE installation
(similar to the symbolic ure-link in the Unix case). (If I get Kay
right, in a sense, he wants to by default evaluate that persistently
stored information late rather than early, so that the stored
information still references the registry key under which the latest URE
advertised its location, rather than resolving that reference once at
OOo-wo-URE--installation-time and storing a concrete path to a URE.
This has the advantage that later on replacing the current URE with a
better one *at a different location* is transparent for the OOo-wo-URE
clients.)
-Stephan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
