LO 4 install deletes 3.6

users
#1

In an attempt to compare the latest LO and AOO offerings, today I installed both LO 4.0.4 and AOO 4.0 on my Win7 machine.

Until now, I have been happily using LO 3.6.6.2, having previously tried an earlier release in the LO 4 series.

When I previously installed LO 4, I noticed that it seemed to uninstall my previous version of LO 3.6. After encountering some problems with LO 4, I uninstalled it and reinstalled LO 3.6.

On the prior occasion, I just assumed that, when installing LO 4, I had inadvertently clicked some option to uninstall the old 3.6. So, today, when I installed LO 4, I was very careful to make sure that I did not check any box indicating my desire to uninstall LO 3.6.6.2.

Nevertheless, LO 4 installed and, once again, my installation of LO 3.6.6.2 disappeared.

Does anyone know if this is intentional behavior? It has happened to me now twice, and I’m 90% certain that it was not due to anything I did.

If it is intentional, I find it most offensive. I can’t believe the TDF developers would be so presumptuous as to decide for me that I no longer want LO 3.6 on my system. This is the type of “let us think for you” behavior I would expect from MS, not from a FOSS project.

btw, AOO 4.0 installed quite nicely *next to* AOO 3.4.1, and I am able to run both programs.

Sorry, TDF, but on this one I have to give AOO a +1.

Virgil

#2

Virgil,

Not sure how far down the rabbit hole you'd like to go, but the simple truth is that full installs of LibreOffice 3.x and LibreOffice 4.x use identical components of Microsoft Windows registry and system paths and are mutually exclusive.

One can happily run multiple versions of LibreOffice (or a mix of LibreOffice and OpenOffice), but they will not be fully integrated with Microsoft Windows OS--and at any given time only one can be fully integrated with the Windows OS.

Recognizing that this is the normal use case--that is how the LibreOffice installer behaves by default. If you need it to do something else you have to do more than click on the installer. And, fyi, the Apache OpenOffice installer behaves exactly the same, but is less functional in migrating user settings and supporting extensions.

Stuart

#3

I think Win7 may think LO 4.x is the upgrade to 3.x and decide that to install the newer version it must uninstall the older one. I have noticed that with a lot of packages lately. Win7 deletes any previous versions of the software before the newer one is installed.

To be honest
For most users, they would want that to happen. The "average" user does not want multiple versions of a package installed on a Windows system. So, I would say that Win7 or even Win8, might thing it is a proper thing to do, uninstall old before new is installed to avoid package conflicts or mis-matched DLL files, etc., etc..

#4

Folks

This is a normal function of Windows 7/8 and LO. When installing one version higher or lower, it is coded to use a central store in this hidden by default location "C:\Users\<user account

\AppData\Roaming\LibreOffice\4\user\config". So installing two

versions will use the same default store and challenge and change this store of the global settings.

This link will show you how to overcome this as I have done with 4.0.42 and 4.1.0.3 running simultaneously in a windows environment https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Installing_in_parallel. The web link supplied explains on how to relocate the global settings into the second version of LO installed so as not to create any conflicts.

Although I have never attempted this with AOO, I am sure a similiar process can be found on their website and done. As per above my LO version global setting are now located as such C:\Applications\LibreOffice 4.1\Data\settings\user\config.

Regards

Andrew

#5

Stuart wrote,

Recognizing that this is the normal use case--that is how the LibreOffice installer behaves by default. If you need it to do >something else you have to do more than click on the installer. And, fyi, the Apache OpenOffice installer behaves exactly the >same, but is less functional in migrating user settings and supporting extensions.

But, in my experience, the AOO installer did *not* behave "exactly the same." When installing AOO 4.0, the installer appears to have left AOO 3.4.1 alone. Both appear on my system, properly in their respective folders. Both still appear on my desktop, and I can run either one as I wish. I confess I have no idea what's happening down the rabbit hole, but on the surface, I have two versions of AOO running side by side on my system.

By contrast, LO 4 *deleted* nearly everything in my "Program Files (x86)\LibreOffice 3.6" folder and installed LO 4 into a *new* folder, called "Program Files (x86)\LibreOffice 4" folder. I can understand overwriting older versions of software *in the same folder* but when a new version creates a new folder, then it should leave the older version alone just as AOO seems to do.

Also, when installing AOO 4, I was asked if I wanted to migrate my user settings from v. 3.4.1. LO didn't ask; it just did it.

Virgil

#6

Hi Virgil

You have observed correctly. I have just done a test of installing two version of AOO under Windows 7, and quite correctly, it installs it's own local cache/store of settings, per version, thus allowing two copies to work side by side, as long as you create two distinct install folders (by default I never allow any installing program's defaults in Windows 7, many known issues with virtual links to folders etc). And correct in your observation, as well as my earlier supplied info, LO does not do this, rather opting for a single user settings store, detecting another install of LO, and uninstalling it, before installing the upgrade (or possible downgrade). But this is not a bad thing though, as covered by other respondees.

The link I supplied in my earlier email shows one how to overcome this issue of LO and a universal store, allowing for two versions simultaneous and operational on Windows 7.

Regards

Andrew

#7

Thanks, Andrew; I hadn't noticed this before. My LO 3.4 directory is still present, but practically empty. This is NOT good behavior if the user is not notified first. I'll be sure to go back and find your earlier message and save it, for future use. When there's an upgrade (as opposed to a patch), I want the ability to test it before abandoning my old software. Guess I'm fortunate not to have had issues going from 3.4 to 4.0!

Dave

#8

Thanks, Andrew; I hadn't noticed this before. My LO 3.4 directory is
still present, but practically empty.

All the modified files such as extensions and dictionaries are not removed, so I cannot see a problem there.

#9

Hi :slight_smile:
'Fortunate' like 99.99% of people!  Upgrading from 3.x.x to 4.0.x produced a startling lack of bump in traffic on this list, except old die-hards remarking on how well it went.  The 4.1.0-beta gave more of a bump but still nothing like the start of a new branch used to produce here.

If we take the ancient figure of 60milion users (am i remembering correctly?) world-wide and that this is the international list and gets emails from Japan, India, Iran, even New Zealand and all around the globe i think we can safely say that
1.  not so many are upgrading and/or
2.  not many are having troubles  of course there is another possiblity but LO usage seems to be growing rapidly, not dwindling!

Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#10

Or, people have upgraded, have had problems, and are too disappointed to keep reporting them.

For example, as I reported before, LO 3.6.6.2 properly loads the style list in the format it was in on the last close out. For me that is "hierarchical," my preferred way of displaying styles.

LO 4.0 went back to the "old" behavior of defaulting to another view setting.

LO 4.0.4 has really strange behavior. When a document loads with the style list, the notation at the bottom of the list *says* it's hierarchical (just as I wanted), but the actual list is not arranged hierarchically; it is arranged alphabetically. Admittedly, it's a minor irritation, but one that I didn't have with LO 3.6

As we now know, upgrades sometimes contain bug regressions. That being the case, an upgrade to LO 4 should politely leave LO 3.6 alone, so those of us who prefer the older version wouldn't have to reinstall it. AOO has done this; TDF should be able to as well.

Virgil

#11

Hi :slight_smile:
You are assuming a static number of users.  LO is growing rapidly such that most of the users are new users that haven't had time to be disappointed yet.

I think you are right though and that this issue should be reported as a bug unless it already has been.

Personally i quite like that i don't have to worry about what happens to the 3.x.x folder and just let the installer grab all my old settings and move them into the new folder.  I do have plenty of space but don't really want stray bits dupliacted all over the place leaving future users uncertain of what they can't delete.

On one machine with MSO 2007 i found MSO 2000 and uninstalled it only to find that took the 2007 with it.  The 2007 was an upgrade on the 2000 and hadn't bothered to change any names.  Frankly i prefer the 4.0.0s way to that!! :slight_smile:
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile: