Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2009 02:28:22 +0200 From: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> To: Chad Perrin <perrin@apotheon.com> Cc: FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: upgrade from Firefox 3.0 to Firefox 3.5 Message-ID: <20090718022822.07ca9f17.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: <20090718000736.GA90771@kokopelli.hydra> References: <20090717224837.GA52217@kokopelli.hydra> <20090718014347.1a182ef7.freebsd@edvax.de> <20090718000736.GA90771@kokopelli.hydra>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 17 Jul 2009 18:07:36 -0600, Chad Perrin <perrin@apotheon.com> wrote: > On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 01:43:47AM +0200, Polytropon wrote: > > On Fri, 17 Jul 2009 16:48:37 -0600, Chad Perrin <perrin@apotheon.com> wrote: > > > So . . . how do I upgrade Firefox from 3.0 to 3.5 without running the > > > risk of losing everything (bookmarks, a 100-tab session, et cetera)? > > > > Well, I don't think those settings get altered in any way - they do not > > reside in the port's directories (where it will be installed into). > > To be sure, make a backup copy of your ~/.mozilla/ directory before. > > Does that cover both bookmarks *and* my tab session? I think so. Because a !root user cannot write to Firefox's directories (inside the /usr/local/ subtree), data local to the user will be stored in his home directory. The correct path is ~/.mozilla/firefox and maybe ~/.mozilla/default. I can at least confirm it for the bookmarks. I haven't checked for tab sessions because I'm not using that feature. But just judging from a conceptual point of view: WHY NOT? :-) > > > For > > > some reason, it seems that the upgrade has to be made by deleting 3.0 and > > > installing 3.5 afterward. What's up with that? > > > > No idea. Anyway, user's files won't be touched. > > Do you know this from personal experience, or are you just assuming that > I won't pull out all my hair five seconds after I discover it deleted a > bunch of shit I wanted to keep? As I said, I can confirm it for bookmarks in Firefox. It's a similar thing with Thunderbird's mailboxes. The rest is just deduction from UNIX principles, formed into a kind of counter-question: Why (and how) should user data be saved within the application's directory structures? The update process will ONLY have effect on the files installed by the port. Are your user files mentioned in the corresponding control files of the port? Surely not - how could they? The port will only delete those files that are list as have been installed by the port, nothing more, nothing less. -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090718022822.07ca9f17.freebsd>