In a message dated 2009.04.11 05:02 -0500, Michael Adams wrote:
Trying to open a Base file (that was apparently corrupted in saving),
First i'll make an assumption. As you are using the latest Thunderbird
on Vista you are probably using the latest OO.o.
Michael, thanks for being explicit about assumptions, but they can still be
dangerous: The header:
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302)
gets the mail client right, but "Windows/20090302" is Windows XPSP3 (latest
patches), not Vista.
And dangerous in a second way: For reasons I won't bore you with, the
computer from which I'm doing the email is not the computer on which I'm
otherwise working. [*That* computer is running OO 3.0.1, also under
Win_XPSP3, as well as Mepis and Ubuntu, with the /home partition accessible
to both Linux and Win as I try to complete a migration to Linux that is
stalling on getting workable functionality from OO while still keeping all
of my other balls in the air. But I digress.]
The vista dialogue box for saving has an option to untick adding of
automatic file extensions. If this was done then your database may not
be corrupt but misnamed. The correct extension is .odb for a database.
IAC, I let OO choose the file extension, and of course it chose .odb.
OO opens instead a "Filter Selection" pane, which implictly invites
one to pick a filter that handles that file type.
Which if the database file was corrupt then it would not matter which
filter you applied. But you do have a second chance of recovering data
if you add a .zip extension and unpack the file. If it unpacks cleanly
then it was likely not corrupt.
It's true: no file format filter can interpret a corrupt database file. A
little more background: besides OO's response, one reason for thinking the
file corrupt was a 45KB size, when there were no records in the file, just
structural data (fields and relationships). I unzipped and examined, and
everything seemed in order; then re-zipped and the filesize shrunk from 45KB
to 4KB - but still OO responds with that "Filter Selection" dialog.
As for the minor filter issue you have raised, i haven't addressed this
as it is the wrong forum for RFE's. Try... http://qa.openoffice.org/
RFE? - I'm not sure I'd call a request to sort that list a "Request for
Enhancement". The lack of some sorting criterion for a list of 163 entries
can IMHO be fairly called a bug, or at least lazy design. Because I'm far
from the first person to mention this on the lists or report it as a bug
<http://qa.openoffice.org/servlets/Search?artifact=issuezilla+issue&query=%22Filter%20Selection%22&scope=domain>,
it hardly makes sense for me to file yet another bug report. [Most such
bugs have been closed, marked as duplicates of 55152 - and nothing is
happening on that, status "UNCONFIRMED"<!> - yet another clue that bug
management is not OO's strength. But again I digress.]
Thanks for your reply,
John
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
