Re: SM 2.53.1 and SM 2.49.5
alexyu wrote on 12/04/2020 9:21 AM: NFN Smith wrote, on 07 Apr 20 11:42: xxyyz wrote: I have SM 2.49.5 32 bit on WXP and 64 bit on W7, and have been synching them by copying the Mozilla folders (C:\Documents and Settings\username\Mozilla on WXP, C:\Users\username\AppData\Roaming \Mozilla on W7) to and fro, with no problems. If I put SM 2.53.1 64 bit on the W7 machine, will I still be able to do this? If you're doing this kind of activity to allow you to have your mail on more than one machine, you really need to move to IMAP, where your mail is stored on the server. Even if it is technically possible to copy your profiles back and forth between two machines, Seamonkey was never designed to work that way. Conversely, IMAP is designed this kind of condition. I have a similar setup, with one important difference: Both OS's (WXP & W7) are on separate partitions on dual-boot one disk, and I have SM and FF on both, with just one profile (on a non-standard location) for each 'set' (one for both SM's, one for both FF's . I also periodically copy select data from one set to the other, but that's secondary here). On this Laptop, I dual-boot Win7 and various Linux OS'. As Linux can "see" my Win7 partitions but Win7 cannot "see" my Linux installs, I have my SeaMonkey Profile so both OS' can "see" it!! Considering other points in this thread, this setup is not just "to have [my] mail on more than one machine", but much more: To have a seamless browser/email experience on the two OS's (because I use each one for different purposes, but want to have that possibility). Also, this setup uses SM 2.49.5 and FF ESR 52.7.4 and is expected to 'stop there', since I have dozens of AddOns I want to keep using, and most of them will no longer work on newer releases (yes, even SM 2.53). When I first implemented this, I knew that some files in the Profile used 'physical' addresses but, since the Profile would be accessed by any OS in any order, I hoped that SM/FF would automatically handle this (a behavior I noticed during tries towards this setup), and it seems to work flawlessly (except for a few Extensions) so far. About the only problem I've had with my Dual-Booting set-up is when I want to download a file onto my Hard Drive, my Win7 might be trying to save the file to '/Downloads'. The '/' indicates that the download was destined for a Linux partition which Win7 knows nothing about so, more or less, responds "HUH!!" The statement that "SeaMonkey was never designed to work that way" brought this back for me, since I also imagined that this was true, but see that nevertheless it DOES "work that way" for me -- and, since I have never seen any information about this, I'd like to know if anyone can furnish any, and warn of any potential problems with this setup. '... nevertheless it DOES "work that way" for me ...' YEAP!! -- Daniel Win7 User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 SeaMonkey/2.49.5 Build identifier: 20190609032134 Linux User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 SeaMonkey/2.49.1 Build identifier: 20171015235623 ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.53.1 and SM 2.49.5
NFN Smith wrote, on 07 Apr 20 11:42: xxyyz wrote: I have SM 2.49.5 32 bit on WXP and 64 bit on W7, and have been synching them by copying the Mozilla folders (C:\Documents and Settings\username\Mozilla on WXP, C:\Users\username\AppData\Roaming \Mozilla on W7) to and fro, with no problems. If I put SM 2.53.1 64 bit on the W7 machine, will I still be able to do this? If you're doing this kind of activity to allow you to have your mail on more than one machine, you really need to move to IMAP, where your mail is stored on the server. Even if it is technically possible to copy your profiles back and forth between two machines, Seamonkey was never designed to work that way. Conversely, IMAP is designed this kind of condition. I have a similar setup, with one important difference: Both OS's (WXP & W7) are on separate partitions on dual-boot one disk, and I have SM and FF on both, with just one profile (on a non-standard location) for each 'set' (one for both SM's, one for both FF's . I also periodically copy select data from one set to the other, but that's secondary here). Considering other points in this thread, this setup is not just "to have [my] mail on more than one machine", but much more: To have a seamless browser/email experience on the two OS's (because I use each one for different purposes, but want to have that possibility). Also, this setup uses SM 2.49.5 and FF ESR 52.7.4 and is expected to 'stop there', since I have dozens of AddOns I want to keep using, and most of them will no longer work on newer releases (yes, even SM 2.53). When I first implemented this, I knew that some files in the Profile used 'physical' addresses but, since the Profile would be accessed by any OS in any order, I hoped that SM/FF would automatically handle this (a behavior I noticed during tries towards this setup), and it seems to work flawlessly (except for a few Extensions) so far. The statement that "SeaMonkey was never designed to work that way" brought this back for me, since I also imagined that this was true, but see that nevertheless it DOES "work that way" for me -- and, since I have never seen any information about this, I'd like to know if anyone can furnish any, and warn of any potential problems with this setup. -- Best, s) alexyu ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.53.1 and SM 2.49.5
At 04/08/202011:17 AM-0700, Ray Davison wrote: Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote: No his answer is from a parallel universe where all this works. If 2.49.5 sees the 2.53 places.sqlite it will move it to places.sqlite.corrupt and restore bookmarks from the latest json backup. All history is gone then. favicon storing changed in Firefox / Gecko 55 and caused this change. Indexdb starage is also incomapatible and so on. FRG OK, you got me. You loose bookmarks. And you are probably right about the "parallel universe". I have been using my primary profile. I deleted everything that looked like it was saving things for "just in case" including the storage sub-directory. Ran 2.53.1. Copied that profile to WXP 2.49.5. The bookmarks didn't make it. I know there are bookmark backup files of places.sqlite, but I decided long ago to make bookmarks separate from the program or data files. Turning on auto export of bookmarks to html leaves a current html bookmark file in the browser program file folder. I made a separate folder in root "Bookmarks", and place the exported bookmark file there. That html bookmark file is used as the home page of each of the several browsers on the machine. A desktop bat file copies the html auto-exported to the bookmarks directory. One of the browsers, Seamonkey of course, is the "main" bookmark source. I also have another bat file on the desktop to copy bookmarks.html to bookmarks2.html, 2 to 3, etc for redundant copies. Now bookmarks are isolated from accidents. Mario And, all this has made my point about changing things "under the covers", quietly, and making it appear that nothing has changed. I have never blindly followed an "upgrade path", on OSs or apps. Many upgrades aren't. I install the new along side the old, run the new as as close as possible with the old data. And, if at some point I prefer the new, and no longer see a need for the old, I delete the old. That is why I now have seven SM plus PM and FM. And right now they all have negatives for me. Failure I think I am prepared for. I am not accustomed to having to look for tricks to make the old look like the new. And it increases my support for separating things so they are easier to manage and recover. Which I will discuss again elsewhere. Ray ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.53.1 and SM 2.49.5
Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote: I wish we chould have retained compatibility for XP I can understand how you might have been in a hurry to get off an answer to the initial question, but if you had slowed down long enough to say it was a WXP issue, some of us would have gotten an important piece of information, and I would not have said anything. I understand that when the Mozilla parent became the child, SM became an orphan. Ray ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.53.1 and SM 2.49.5
Ray Davison wrote: Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote: I have never blindly followed an "upgrade path", on OSs or apps. Many upgrades aren't. I install the new along side the old, run the new as as close as possible with the old data. And, if at some point I prefer the new, and no longer see a need for the old, I delete the old. That is why I now have seven SM plus PM and FM. And right now they all have negatives for me. Failure I think I am prepared for. I am not accustomed to having to look for tricks to make the old look like the new. And it increases my support for separating things so they are easier to manage and recover. Which I will discuss again elsewhere. Ray I wish we chould have retained compatibility for XP but it was just not possible. Downgrading always came with breakage but it just wasn't until recently that this became a big problem. But there is no chance that we can retain compatibility with older versions and get away with it. Too much in gecko changed and still does. It is a wonder that 2.53.x even mostly works as always with all the changes under the hood. FRG ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.53.1 and SM 2.49.5
Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote: No his answer is from a parallel universe where all this works. If 2.49.5 sees the 2.53 places.sqlite it will move it to places.sqlite.corrupt and restore bookmarks from the latest json backup. All history is gone then. favicon storing changed in Firefox / Gecko 55 and caused this change. Indexdb starage is also incomapatible and so on. FRG OK, you got me. You loose bookmarks. And you are probably right about the "parallel universe". I have been using my primary profile. I deleted everything that looked like it was saving things for "just in case" including the storage sub-directory. Ran 2.53.1. Copied that profile to WXP 2.49.5. The bookmarks didn't make it. And, all this has made my point about changing things "under the covers", quietly, and making it appear that nothing has changed. I have never blindly followed an "upgrade path", on OSs or apps. Many upgrades aren't. I install the new along side the old, run the new as as close as possible with the old data. And, if at some point I prefer the new, and no longer see a need for the old, I delete the old. That is why I now have seven SM plus PM and FM. And right now they all have negatives for me. Failure I think I am prepared for. I am not accustomed to having to look for tricks to make the old look like the new. And it increases my support for separating things so they are easier to manage and recover. Which I will discuss again elsewhere. Ray ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.53.1 and SM 2.49.5
Ant wrote: On 4/7/2020 3:15 PM, Ray Davison wrote: ... The short answer is; absolutely. All you need to manage SM is a little knowledge of sub-directory structure and copy. Wait. Older SM versions (e.g., v2.49.5) can read newer SM versions (v2.53.1)'s datas like places.sqlite? :O No his answer is from a parallel universe where all this works. If 2.49.5 sees the 2.53 places.sqlite it will move it to places.sqlite.corrupt and restore bookmarks from the latest json backup. All history is gone then. favicon storing changed in Firefox / Gecko 55 and caused this change. Indexdb starage is also incomapatible and so on. FRG ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.53.1 and SM 2.49.5
On 4/7/2020 3:15 PM, Ray Davison wrote: ... The short answer is; absolutely. My PC "cubical" has three desktops and one laptop, and I have recently setup three other laptops. And, since the first DrDOS every machine has had at least two OSs. Currently the laptops have two each and the desktops each have five. So I was able to do exactly what you asked. I did not have a WXP with SM 2.49.5. So I copied the 2.49.5 app tree from a laptop to the WXP box. Then I did a newer-file-only copy of the profile tree and the mail tree from the laptop to the WXP box. BTW, that newer-file-only copy to another box is my backup system. I opened the WXP 2.49.5 sub-directory, and copied the run object/shortcut to the WXP desktop. I than ran the 2.49.5 shortcut on the WXP box. I looked at the bookmarks and passwords and ran a link off the history. SM 2.49.5 on WXP now has the same data as 2.53.1 on the laptop. My "Welcome to Netscape" email is dated 2June97. I have always considered NS/Moz/SM a very friendly app. Some don't seem to like sharing. Where I have two Win partitions they share both the app and data. For several years I had OS/2 and Win with their own app versions but sharing profiles and mail. I am a little concerned with 2.53.1. In the past the only time I needed to be concerned with sharing data was when we went from 1X to 2X. And they made a big deal of it, and bumped the version a whole number. And I would never install one SM version over another, especially after they say it is too different to share a profile with a previous version. The only clue I have about issues with 2.53.1 is something to do with master passwords. Since my master password is the lock on the door I tried several recent versions with the same profile. On one machine I currently have things that call themselves 2.49.5, 2.50, 2.53.3b1, 2.53.1, and 2.57a1. Some are WG9. I ran back and forth thru them at least twice. Only 2.57a1 had issues. All you need to manage SM is a little knowledge of sub-directory structure and copy. Wait. Older SM versions (e.g., v2.49.5) can read newer SM versions (v2.53.1)'s datas like places.sqlite? :O -- :) Holy Wk! Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly. /\___/\ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.ma.cx / / /\ /\ \ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org | |o o| | Axe ANT from its address if shown & e-mailing privately. \ _ / Please kindly use Ant nickname & URL/link if crediting. ( ) ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.53.1 and SM 2.49.5
xxyyz wrote: I have SM 2.49.5 32 bit on WXP and 64 bit on W7, and have been synching them by copying the Mozilla folders (C:\Documents and Settings\username\Mozilla on WXP, C:\Users\username\AppData\Roaming \Mozilla on W7) to and fro, with no problems. If I put SM 2.53.1 64 bit on the W7 machine, will I still be able to do this? The short answer is; absolutely. My PC "cubical" has three desktops and one laptop, and I have recently setup three other laptops. And, since the first DrDOS every machine has had at least two OSs. Currently the laptops have two each and the desktops each have five. So I was able to do exactly what you asked. I did not have a WXP with SM 2.49.5. So I copied the 2.49.5 app tree from a laptop to the WXP box. Then I did a newer-file-only copy of the profile tree and the mail tree from the laptop to the WXP box. BTW, that newer-file-only copy to another box is my backup system. I opened the WXP 2.49.5 sub-directory, and copied the run object/shortcut to the WXP desktop. I than ran the 2.49.5 shortcut on the WXP box. I looked at the bookmarks and passwords and ran a link off the history. SM 2.49.5 on WXP now has the same data as 2.53.1 on the laptop. My "Welcome to Netscape" email is dated 2June97. I have always considered NS/Moz/SM a very friendly app. Some don't seem to like sharing. Where I have two Win partitions they share both the app and data. For several years I had OS/2 and Win with their own app versions but sharing profiles and mail. I am a little concerned with 2.53.1. In the past the only time I needed to be concerned with sharing data was when we went from 1X to 2X. And they made a big deal of it, and bumped the version a whole number. And I would never install one SM version over another, especially after they say it is too different to share a profile with a previous version. The only clue I have about issues with 2.53.1 is something to do with master passwords. Since my master password is the lock on the door I tried several recent versions with the same profile. On one machine I currently have things that call themselves 2.49.5, 2.50, 2.53.3b1, 2.53.1, and 2.57a1. Some are WG9. I ran back and forth thru them at least twice. Only 2.57a1 had issues. All you need to manage SM is a little knowledge of sub-directory structure and copy. Ray ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.53.1 and SM 2.49.5
xxyyz wrote: I have SM 2.49.5 32 bit on WXP and 64 bit on W7, and have been synching them by copying the Mozilla folders (C:\Documents and Settings\username\Mozilla on WXP, C:\Users\username\AppData\Roaming \Mozilla on W7) to and fro, with no problems. If I put SM 2.53.1 64 bit on the W7 machine, will I still be able to do this? If you're doing this kind of activity to allow you to have your mail on more than one machine, you really need to move to IMAP, where your mail is stored on the server. Even if it is technically possible to copy your profiles back and forth between two machines, Seamonkey was never designed to work that way. Conversely, IMAP is designed this kind of condition. Smith ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.53.1 and SM 2.49.5
xxyyz wrote: I have SM 2.49.5 32 bit on WXP and 64 bit on W7, and have been synching them by copying the Mozilla folders (C:\Documents and Settings\username\Mozilla on WXP, C:\Users\username\AppData\Roaming \Mozilla on W7) to and fro, with no problems. If I put SM 2.53.1 64 bit on the W7 machine, will I still be able to do this? No. FRG ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
SM 2.53.1 and SM 2.49.5
I have SM 2.49.5 32 bit on WXP and 64 bit on W7, and have been synching them by copying the Mozilla folders (C:\Documents and Settings\username\Mozilla on WXP, C:\Users\username\AppData\Roaming \Mozilla on W7) to and fro, with no problems. If I put SM 2.53.1 64 bit on the W7 machine, will I still be able to do this? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
