update.pl: When run from installer, I think that update.pl should only run the numeric db revs. I don't know why = a developer should be able to test from CLI. In production,
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=7167 --- Comment #112 from Paul Poulain <paul.poulain@biblibre.com> --- (In reply to comment #100) there should not be any non numeric update. If a library make a local update, it can be non numeric it doesn't matter, it's managed by the library.
Note that the current code around line 52/53 does not handle that correctly: Argument "\x{74}\x{65}..." isn't numeric in numeric ge (>=) at installer/data/mysql/update.pl line 52. I just added a provisional test now to get further. Please correct. Maybe you need an additional parameter here? Problem fixed. If you have a non-numeric version number, it will be applied without reporting any error when you --all.
chmod 755 was needed on update.pl; the system call in install.pl to update.pl did not work for that reason. OK, fixed.
And of course, if you run it that way include a shebang line. Did that now too. OK, fixed.
Please add copyright as well. OK, fixed.
Output from webinstaller now includes: 3.09.00.027 => ARRAY(0x1b1da88). Please correct. The webinstaller lists the wrong new version; it now lists 3.9.0.26 but it will install 27 too. OK, fixed
The subsequent calls to IPC run and print_std do not work somehow. Only the output from the second call is shown.
IMO The logic in C4/Auth.pm around line 590 is not correct. It should redirect to installer for all numeric db revs and redirect only to the new update for the non-numerical ones.
(In reply to comment #105)
I think displaying the errors from the DBMS untranslated will be most useful. Upgrades are supposed to be run by a system administrator of some kind and they will have to find out what's going wrong on database level, if there is a problem. Being able to google the original error message might be more useful than a not so exact translated message we could come up with. Agreed, we've fixed that too
(In reply to comment #111)
Based on a further look at the code, I withdraw my objections to "parsing" SQL in this context. If I understand correctly, all we are doing here is some basic sanity checks on the SQL to see of stuff exists or not as well as some basic "sorting out" of comments and possibly changing the delimiter.
Someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Chris, you're not wrong.
I'll submit a bunch of updated patch, all the tests we did, and a proposal for updating the wiki. Chris, could you please signoff once again ? (or anyone else) I've deeply reviewed this patch with Jonathan, it will be a real huge improvement for testers & users for the next release. Unless someone object, I'll push this patch on thursday (European) morning -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.