At present we do some special updates as we migrate to make sure things works fine when the 5.0 browser comes up. Bug 14908 might require some alterations to the update process to make sure right file gets used when the 5.0 browser comes up. Bug 14908 wants to copy the 5.0 default files that are supposed to go into each profile before the migration process takes place. Doing that locally on my tree ran me into the following problem. 5.0 copies the default bookmarks file 'bookmarks.html' into the profile location. Now the migration process takes over and copies bunch of files. So, as a part of special updates, it tries to rename the 4.x bookmarks file i.e., 'bookmark.htm' to 'bookmarks.html'. The operation fails as there exists a file 'bookmarks.html' already. As our intention is to make the 4.x info to prevail when migration happens, I am wondering whether we need to delete the default 5.x bookmarks file so that rename does not fail. Adding Seth to cc list.

making 14908 dependent on this.

Adding Steve to the cc list.

I'm still not completely clear on this. If we are migrating a profile, why are we even copying the 5.0 default bookmarks.html to the migrated profile's directory in the first place? Shouldn't we just remove that step?

I'm not sure why this bug even exists. We should figure out a mechanism that doesn't create this conflict. One possibility is to have a separate source for files that go into a migrated profile vs those that go into a new profile. However that works, the discussion should happen in bug 14908 rather than here.

We can have the way steve suggested too. For that we need to have another folder under defaults (right now there are two folders viz., pref and profile) or defaults/profile with files that need to go into the migrated profiles. Right now there are only 2 files under profile, of which only one might need to go into the new folder we are talking about. But I'm wondering over the course of time if there are going to more files, we might have same files sitting in 2 diffrent folders. That might contribute to the size of the app.

Per discussion with racham@netscape.com I'm marking this invalid.

verified