1
gstarrett
Re: Site badly crippled -- upgraded from 2.0.9.2 to 2.2
  • 2005/9/11 22:04

  • gstarrett

  • Friend of XOOPS

  • Posts: 174

  • Since: 2002/3/12


Quote:

floor9 wrote:
2.2 is a test version? It doesn't say that anywhere on the download page. Only that 2.2.3 is an RC. Wish I had known that first.


I'm not sure about that, but I thought it was. Good luck to you.
Glen Starrett
Webmaster, Great Arizona Puppet Theater
and PHP/XOOPS Tinkerer...



2
gstarrett
Re: Site badly crippled -- upgraded from 2.0.9.2 to 2.2
  • 2005/9/11 21:46

  • gstarrett

  • Friend of XOOPS

  • Posts: 174

  • Since: 2002/3/12


Quote:

floor9 wrote:
EDIT: I'm digging myself deeper. Fantastico just popped up with a warning that my version "2.0.9.2" was outdated and should be updated to "2.0.13". I ran the Fantastico script, and my ~/www/content/modules/xoopsgallery directory has vanished! Any ideas on getting it back? If the database still exists, would a re-install of xoopsgallery simply "inherit" the pictures / descriptions / comments from before?


If your xoopsgallery/cache directory is still there, then your albums are all preserved. If not, you'll have to go back to your backup (I'm hoping you did that before starting the upgrade to a test version of XOOPS!).

As for the other issues I can't be much help.
Glen Starrett
Webmaster, Great Arizona Puppet Theater
and PHP/XOOPS Tinkerer...



3
gstarrett
Re: upgraded from 2.0.13 to 2.2 then 2.3 but module blocks are missing
  • 2005/9/11 6:16

  • gstarrett

  • Friend of XOOPS

  • Posts: 174

  • Since: 2002/3/12


Update: I ran through the installer and it does create a umode field as text.

Why are you using text fields instead of varchar? From what I know (with SQLServer background) it's preferable to use at least non-blob type fields in most tables, and fixed-width in the highest contention tables.
Glen Starrett
Webmaster, Great Arizona Puppet Theater
and PHP/XOOPS Tinkerer...



4
gstarrett
Re: upgraded from 2.0.13 to 2.2 then 2.3 but module blocks are missing
  • 2005/9/11 4:45

  • gstarrett

  • Friend of XOOPS

  • Posts: 174

  • Since: 2002/3/12


I upgraded my XOOPS 2.0.10 install by updating each patch along the way: 2.0.12a, 2.0.13, 2.2, finally 2.2.3. I didn't see any other notes on the 2.0.x series about special instructions after updating, so I just copied one up then the other, until getting to 2.2.3. After installing 2.2.3 I ran the xoopsupdate.php and got the same error you're seeing (I think, I didn't compare it exactly).

I checked the full install and it doesn't list a umode field in the install/sql directory either. Maybe a forgotten field or a typo?

Unable to install SystemError(s):
Could not delete user configuration category
Could not insert System to database.
xoops_module_pre_update_system executed successfully.
Unknown column 'umode' in 'field list'
...


The full version seems to install and run OK, but I haven't worked with other than installing.
Glen Starrett
Webmaster, Great Arizona Puppet Theater
and PHP/XOOPS Tinkerer...



5
gstarrett
Re: TextSanitizer and single quotes
  • 2004/7/25 7:06

  • gstarrett

  • Friend of XOOPS

  • Posts: 174

  • Since: 2002/3/12


I had a related problem, but mine was only partially resolved by this fix.

I am looking at the preferences for XoopsGallery, and when I am entering a Win32 path, it always doubles the number of \'s that were there when I submit. I type "c:\foo" and after submitting it becomes "c:\\foo" then again and it goes to "c:\\\\foo" and so on.

After applying the patch, now it only double's it the first time so I always have "c:\\foo" after submitting any number of times.

Here's the declaration for the preference from the xoops_version.php:
$modversion['config'][1]['name'] = 'pnmDir';
$modversion['config'][1]['title'] = '_MI_GALLERY_PNMDIR';
$modversion['config'][1]['description'] = '_MI_GALLERY_PNMDIRDSC';
$modversion['config'][1]['formtype'] = 'textbox';
$modversion['config'][1]['valuetype'] = 'text';
$modversion['config'][1]['default'] = '/usr/bin';




6
gstarrett
Re: Module PHP help

Quote:
<?php
include(XOOPS_ROOT_PATH."/mainfile.php");
include(XOOPS_ROOT_PATH."/header.php");
include(XOOPS_ROOT_PATH."/modules/openmoogle/moogleindex.php;
//standard for module name recognition
$ModName = 'OpenMoogle';
?>


You're missing a close quote and paren on your 3rd include... this will make the parser happy:

Quote:
<?php
include(XOOPS_ROOT_PATH."/mainfile.php");
include(XOOPS_ROOT_PATH."/header.php");
include(XOOPS_ROOT_PATH."/modules/openmoogle/moogleindex.php");
//standard for module name recognition
$ModName = 'OpenMoogle';
?>




7
gstarrett
Re: xoops Gallery Print To Shutterfly 'fix'
  • 2004/6/1 19:31

  • gstarrett

  • Friend of XOOPS

  • Posts: 174

  • Since: 2002/3/12


The current version of XoopsGallery (1.3.3.3, released Nov. 2003) has the working Shutterfly functionality included.



8
gstarrett
Re: We give up
  • 2004/4/14 17:41

  • gstarrett

  • Friend of XOOPS

  • Posts: 174

  • Since: 2002/3/12


Quote:

ylw633 wrote:
today is a sad day.... we are suspended by our hosting company "lunarpages.com" because they said we used too much resource. we only use the news and newbb module, but XOOPS still can't handle our load.

xoops once again failed us, i guess we'll have to switch to postnuke, hopefully they perform better.


What does your host mean by "resource"? Processing is the obvious guess, but there a lot of things that factor into resource use from a system perspective: Bandwidth, disk space, IO use, number of connections. All those are significant in any discussion of resources. It would be helpful to at least understand what it is they think XOOPS is using too much of.



9
gstarrett
Re: insert a website into xoops without sideblocks
  • 2004/3/18 7:38

  • gstarrett

  • Friend of XOOPS

  • Posts: 174

  • Since: 2002/3/12


You can follow the standard instructions to add your page to XOOPS, then hide the blocks on the pages you don't want them to appear on using either the show_rblock constant or the blocks admin page.

Hope that makes sense.



10
gstarrett
Edit User bug

I'm using XOOPS 2.0.6. I've noticed whenever I do a "modify user", it shows my username in the nick spot and tries to change their nick to mine (e.g. if I "modify user" then immediately submit, it displays an error saying the nick is taken).

Can anyone else can confirm / dispute this? It's been there since in 2.0.5.x, maybe earlier. I don't modify users that often, but occasionally will reset someone's password. I'm suspecting it's just a seldom used function.




TopTop
(1) 2 3 4 ... 13 »



Login

Who's Online

67 user(s) are online (30 user(s) are browsing Support Forums)


Members: 0


Guests: 67


more...

Donat-O-Meter

Stats
Goal: $100.00
Due Date: Jul 31
Gross Amount: $0.00
Net Balance: $0.00
Left to go: $100.00
Make donations with PayPal!

Latest GitHub Commits