Patch vs. Monthly Patch problem

Hi all!We've done a customization that required a modification to LLRequestHandler.ExecuteWithLogin().We did this by patching this method so that it's inherited to all subsequent objects of type LLRequestHandler.Unfortunately, the June 2001 Monthly Patch also patches this method ExecuteWithLogin().In our opinion, there's only one way to solve this collision: Since OLD fashioned patches (patxxxxx.txt) are always loaded BEFORE NEW fashioned (xx-xxxx.pat) ones and our patch is an OLD fashioned one while the Monthly Patch is a NEW one, we would have to replace our OLD fashioned patch by a NEW fashioned one, e.g. "12-2005.pat" that is loaded as the last one.But, while we know how to create an OLD fashioned patch, we don't know how to create a NEW fashioned patch. The internal format differs and may have sub-patches.Does anyone have some documentation or "hand-written" instruction how to create a NEW fashioned patch???Any help and hints are welcome.Best regardsMatthias AltmannRSH GmbHWagenberger Stra?e 185662 Hohenbrunn GERMANYFon: +49 8102 74 97 15Fax: +49 8102 74 97 45Mobile: +49 172 850 86 44Mail: mailto:altmann@first-business.deSite: http://www.first-business.de

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

eLink User

Message from Matthias Altmann via eLinkHi again,I've just analyzed the format of a new fashioned patch and it came out thatit's nearly the same format as the old patches plus an additional statement"E End of patch..." at the end, that might be omitted.So I just tried to rename my patxxxxx.txt to 12-2005.pat - and it loadedfine!BUT: While the patch routine applies ALL OLD fashioned patches, it onlyapplies the NEWEST NEW fashioned patch and thus skips the 06-2001 monthlypatch completely. Argh!It seems that the only way to implement the 06-2001 and our own patch bycombining those two to a let's say 06-9000.pat, using the year "9000"instead of "2001" to avoid confusion with the original OT Monthly Patch.Does anyone have a better solution?Best regardsMatthias AltmannRSH GmbHWagenberger Stra?e 185662 Hohenbrunn GERMANYFon: +49 8102 74 97 15Fax: +49 8102 74 97 45Mobile: +49 172 850 86 44Mail: mailto:altmann@first-business.deSite: http://www.first-business.de

eLink User

Message from Bax Ruud, F.C. via eLinkI was always told that the latest patch inhabits all the previous patches aswell.So there's no need to run all older patches also !?!Kind regards,Ruud Bax - Oranjewoud> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----> Van: eLink Discussion: Development Discussion> [SMTP:development@elinkkc.opentext.com]> Verzonden: donderdag 26 juli 2001 13:39> Aan: eLink Recipient> Onderwerp: Again Patch vs. Monthly Patch problem> > Again Patch vs. Monthly Patch problem> Posted by eLink on 07/26/2001 08:38 AM> > Message from Matthias Altmann via eLink> > Hi again,> > I've just analyzed the format of a new fashioned patch and it came out> that> it's nearly the same format as the old patches plus an additional> statement> "E End of patch..." at the end, that might be omitted.> > So I just tried to rename my patxxxxx.txt to 12-2005.pat - and it loaded> fine!> > BUT: While the patch routine applies ALL OLD fashioned patches, it only> applies the NEWEST NEW fashioned patch and thus skips the 06-2001 monthly> patch completely. Argh!> > It seems that the only way to implement the 06-2001 and our own patch by> combining those two to a let's say 06-9000.pat, using the year "9000"> instead of "2001" to avoid confusion with the original OT Monthly Patch,> > > Does anyone have a better solution?> > Best regards> > Matthias Altmann> > RSH GmbH> Wagenberger Stra?e 1> 85662 Hohenbrunn > GERMANY> Fon: +49 8102 74 97 15> Fax: +49 8102 74 97 45> Mobile: +49 172 850 86 44> Mail: mailto:altmann@first-business.de> Site: http://www.first-business.de> > [To reply to this thread, use your normal e-mail reply function.]> > ============================================================> > Topic: Patch vs. Monthly Patch problem> https://knowledge.opentext.com/knowledge/livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=255926> 6&objAction=view> > Discussion: Development Discussion> https://knowledge.opentext.com/knowledge/livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=786303> &objAction=view> > Livelink Server:> https://knowledge.opentext.com/knowledge/livelink.exe> > > DISCLAIMERDit e-mail bericht is slechts bestemd voor de (rechts) persoon aan wie het is gericht, en kan informatie bevatten die persoonlijk of vertrouwelijk is. Deze informatie mag niet openbaar worden, tenzij hierom uitdrukkelijk in het e-mailbericht verzocht wordt, dan wel uitdrukkelijk door de verzender en ontvanger van het bericht overeengekomen is.Indien een ander dan de geadresseerde dit e-mail bericht ontvangt, anderszins in handen krijgt of redelijkerwijs kan vermoeden dat de in het bericht verzonden informatie niet voor hem of haar bestemd is, is hij of zij niet gerechtigd tot kennisneming, verspreiding, openbaar maken of vermenigvuldiging daarvan.Hij of zij wordt verzocht Ingenieursbureau ?Oranjewoud? B.V. onmiddellijk telefonisch op de hoogte te stellen en het e-mail bericht te vernietigen.Ingenieursbureau ?Oranjewoud? B.V. staat niet in voor de juiste, tijdige en volledige overbrenging van de inhoud van een verzonden e-mail bericht._______________________________________________________________________________________The information contained in this e-mail message is solely intended for the (legal) person to whom it has been sent. And as it may contain information of a personal or confidential nature, it may not be made public, unless this was specifically requested in the e-mail message, or specifically agreed upon by the sender and receiver of the e-mail message.If someone other than the intended recipient should receive or come into possession of this e-mail message, or can reasonably presume that the information contained in the e-mail message is not intended for him or her, he or she will not be entitled to read, disseminate, disclose or duplicate it. If you are not the intended recipient, you are requested to inform Ingenieursbureau ?Oranjewoud? B.V. immediately by telephone, and to destroy the original e-mail message.Ingenieursbureau ?Oranjewoud? B.V. does not accept any liability for the correct, timely and complete transmission of the contents of a transmitted e-mail message.

eLink User

Message from Matthias Altmann via eLinkThe statement "The latest patch inhabits all the previous patches" is truefor the Monthly Patches.Everey monthly patch contains all previously released monthly patches.And Livelink automatically only applies the latest monthly patch found inthe patch directory.The OLD FASHIONED patches (file names: patxxxxx.txt) are patches of anolder, slightly different format - and from a time when the monthly patchesdid not exist yet.To be correct, the monthly patches are kind of a package of multiple oldfashioned patches:Each of those single patches fixes a bug in Livelink or one of theadditional modules.Once a month those single patches are combined to a "monthly super patch"and published to the customers.OT, explained correctly!? ;-)Matthias AltmannRSH GmbHWagenberger Stra?e 185662 Hohenbrunn GERMANYFon: +49 8102 74 97 15Fax: +49 8102 74 97 45Cell: +49 172 850 86 44Mail: mailto:altmann@first-business.deSite: http://www.first-business.de

eLink User

Message from Kevin Ward via eLinkThe old patches get loaded first in order of their number. They all getloaded.The new patches get loaded next and only the newest one takes effect. Thispresents a problem if you need to change something in the June patch. Youcan make a new patch by simply renaming your old patch to the formatMM-YYYY.pat. However, if your patch is newer than the June patch it won'tload June. If it is older it won't load your patch. Hence, you need toincorporate June patch AND your patch into one.This issue just recently came up and I added an Enhancement Request on itwhich has been slated for a future release.Kevin-----Original Message-----From: knowledge@opentext.com [mailto:knowledge@opentext.com]On Behalf OfeLink Discussion: Development DiscussionSent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 9:23 AMTo: eLink RecipientSubject: RE RE Again Patch vs. Monthly Patch problemRE RE Again Patch vs. Monthly Patch problemPosted by eLink on 07/26/2001 09:23 AMMessage from Matthias Altmann via eLinkThe statement "The latest patch inhabits all the previous patches" is truefor the Monthly Patches.Everey monthly patch contains all previously released monthly patches.And Livelink automatically only applies the latest monthly patch found inthe patch directory.The OLD FASHIONED patches (file names: patxxxxx.txt) are patches of anolder, slightly different format - and from a time when the monthly patchesdid not exist yet.To be correct, the monthly patches are kind of a package of multiple oldfashioned patches:Each of those single patches fixes a bug in Livelink or one of theadditional modules.Once a month those single patches are combined to a "monthly super patch"and published to the customers.OT, explained correctly!? ;-)Matthias AltmannRSH GmbHWagenberger Stra?e 185662 Hohenbrunn GERMANYFon: +49 8102 74 97 15Fax: +49 8102 74 97 45Cell: +49 172 850 86 44Mail: mailto:altmann@first-business.deSite: http://www.first-business.de[To reply to this thread, use your normal e-mail reply function.]============================================================Topic: Patch vs. Monthly Patch problemhttps://knowledge.opentext.com/knowledge/livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=2559266&objAction=viewDiscussion: Development Discussionhttps://knowledge.opentext.com/knowledge/livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=786303&objAction=viewLivelink Server:https://knowledge.opentext.com/knowledge/livelink.exe

eLink User

Message from Hans Stoop <<A HREF="mailto:hstoop@opentext.com">hstoop@opentext.com> via eLink

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">eLink

Another issue is that partners have developed their own modules and would also like to distribute patches for them. The problem is that there is currently no mechanism available that prevents partners for using the same name for the patch file.

One solution for this to put the patches of partners in a subfolder of the patch directory and use the name of the module as name of the partner specific patches.

Hans Stoop

--------------
Register your subtypes in the OScript Registry:
https://knowledge.opentext.com/knowledge/livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=2454603
Consultant Partner Programs Europe
hstoop@opentext.com
+31 23 5652333
http://www.opentext.com/

-----Original Message-----
From: knowledge@opentext.com [mailto:knowledge@opentext.com]On Behalf Of eLink Discussion: Development Discussion
Sent: donderdag 26 juli 2001 18:09
To: eLink Recipient
Subject: RE RE RE Again Patch vs. Monthly Patch problem

RE RE RE Again Patch vs. Monthly Patch problem Posted by eLink on 07/26/2001 12:09 PM
In reply to: RE RE Again Patch vs. Monthly Patch problem Posted by eLink on 07/26/2001 09:23 AM

Message from Kevin Ward <kward@opentext.com> via eLink

The old patches get loaded first in order of their number. They all get
loaded.

The new patches get loaded next and only the newest one takes effect. This
presents a problem if you need to change something in the June patch. You
can make a new patch by simply renaming your old patch to the format
MM-YYYY.pat. However, if your patch is newer than the June patch it won't
load June. If it is older it won't load your patch. Hence, you need to
incorporate June patch AND your patch into one.

This issue just recently came up and I added an Enhancement Request on it
which has been slated for a future release.

Kevin

-----Original Message-----
From: knowledge@opentext.com [mailto:knowledge@opentext.com]On Behalf Of
eLink Discussion: Development Discussion
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 9:23 AM
To: eLink Recipient
Subject: RE RE Again Patch vs. Monthly Patch problem

RE RE Again Patch vs. Monthly Patch problem
Posted by eLink on 07/26/2001 09:23 AM

Message from Matthias Altmann <altmann@first-business.de> via eLink

The statement "The latest patch inhabits all the previous patches" is true
for the Monthly Patches.
Everey monthly patch contains all previously released monthly patches.
And Livelink automatically only applies the latest monthly patch found in
the patch directory.

The OLD FASHIONED patches (file names: patxxxxx.txt) are patches of an
older, slightly different format - and from a time when the monthly patches
did not exist yet.

To be correct, the monthly patches are kind of a package of multiple old
fashioned patches:
Each of those single patches fixes a bug in Livelink or one of the
additional modules.
Once a month those single patches are combined to a "monthly super patch"
and published to the customers.

OT, explained correctly!? ;-)

Matthias Altmann

RSH GmbH
Wagenberger Stra?e 1
85662 Hohenbrunn
GERMANY
Fon: +49 8102 74 97 15
Fax: +49 8102 74 97 45
Cell: +49 172 850 86 44
Mail: mailto:altmann@first-business.de
Site: http://www.first-business.de

[To reply to this thread, use your normal e-mail reply function.]

============================================================

Topic: Patch vs. Monthly Patch problem
https://knowledge.opentext.com/knowledge/livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=2559266&
objAction=view

Discussion: Development Discussion
https://knowledge.opentext.com/knowledge/livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=786303&o
bjAction=view

Livelink Server:
https://knowledge.opentext.com/knowledge/livelink.exe