Quantcast

Is there a problem with Gramps backups (.gpkg files)?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
10 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Is there a problem with Gramps backups (.gpkg files)?

sturdy
I have recently updated from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1 after making .gpkg backups. But, if I understand Benny's note correctly, there may be something wrong with the XML backups or the import process. My backups appear to be okay but can you tell me what I should be checking to identify a potential problem? TIA

Regards,
Sturdy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Is there a problem with Gramps backups (.gpkg files)?

Ron Johnson
On 09/24/2012 10:46 AM, sturdy wrote:
> I have recently updated from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1 after making .gpkg backups. But,
> if I understand Benny's note correctly, there may be something wrong with
> the XML backups or the import process. My backups appear to be okay but can
> you tell me what I should be checking to identify a potential problem? TIA
>

I had trouble with JPGs and TIFFs that I'd renamed in the file system but
not in Gramps, which then royally barfed on "restore" because I hadn't also
renamed them w/in Gramps.

--
If adults of legally sound mind must be told what foods they
are not allowed to buy, then those people are not competent
to choose (i.e. vote for) their own leaders.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Is there a problem with Gramps backups (.gpkg files)?

sturdy
Thanks, Ron, my confidence is restored. :)
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Is there a problem with Gramps backups (.gpkg files)?

Benny Malengier


2012/9/24 sturdy <[hidden email]>
Thanks, Ron, my confidence is restored. :)

Note that if you look at the bugs fixed  in 3.4.0 to 3.4.1 (see release notes), you see that one bug was an xml export bug, where the family order was not respected on export.
If you started 3.4.1 with an import of gpkg, you should check if you are not bitten by that bug. Best is to do backup, but after install, continue working with the family tree you where working on. It is only needed to use the backup if using the old family tree has a problem.

Benny



--
View this message in context: http://gramps.1791082.n4.nabble.com/Is-there-a-problem-with-Gramps-backups-gpkg-files-tp4656725p4656727.html
Sent from the GRAMPS - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Is there a problem with Gramps backups (.gpkg files)?

jerome
In reply to this post by Ron Johnson
> if I understand Benny's note correctly, there may be
> something wrong with the XML backups or the import process.

It was a more general (.gramps and .gpkg) and a more critical issue, fixed on 3.4.1! If you have set a prefered spouse or have specific order of children into a family, you could have a problem if you have created a new family tree from a backup generated by Gramps 3.4.0... No problem by using the Family Tree generated into Gramps 3.4.0, with Gramps 3.4.1.

No records have been lost but custom seizures could have been modified ! :(

"The prefered spouse" is rather a "display" option: a cosmetic issue.
The children order into a family is the critical issue (file generated by Gramps 3.4.0) and it is very difficult to find good rules for batch changes. Human choice is maybe the best !

The problem was related to a new feature added into Gramps 3.4.x, which allow us to see changes with a consistent "skeleton/structure" of data for Gramps XML. Good point was that devs also fixed some issues by testing this feature. Bad point was that we do not needed it on family's internal references ... Note, current Gramps XML file format could be also used for synchronization[1] (like .csv file format but with a better ID handling and currently more data)! So, the backup has tried to be more accessible and useful as a file storage, on the other hand we missed to test some import into new major release (3.4.0), most have been done on devel version: this could be a problem on major migrations.

Note, if you find a problem on family's references (prefered spouse, order of children), maybe to look at previous backups (3.3.x) and last one (3.4.1) and family table. Maybe by Renaming a copy of your .gramps to .gz or gpkg to tar.gz (not certain???); or try the script[2].

That's annoying, but it was one of the critical issue fixed between 3.4.0 and 3.4.1...

[1] http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=GEPS_009:_Import_Export_Merge#Current_Related_Files
[2] http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/images/3/3c/Gramps2xml.gz

--- En date de : Lun 24.9.12, Ron Johnson <[hidden email]> a écrit :

> De: Ron Johnson <[hidden email]>
> Objet: Re: [Gramps-users] Is there a problem with Gramps backups (.gpkg files)?
> À: [hidden email]
> Date: Lundi 24 septembre 2012, 18h51
> On 09/24/2012 10:46 AM, sturdy
> wrote:
> > I have recently updated from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1 after
> making .gpkg backups. But,
> > if I understand Benny's note correctly, there may be
> something wrong with
> > the XML backups or the import process. My backups
> appear to be okay but can
> > you tell me what I should be checking to identify a
> potential problem? TIA
> >
>
> I had trouble with JPGs and TIFFs that I'd renamed in the
> file system but
> not in Gramps, which then royally barfed on "restore"
> because I hadn't also
> renamed them w/in Gramps.
>
> --
> If adults of legally sound mind must be told what foods
> they
> are not allowed to buy, then those people are not competent
> to choose (i.e. vote for) their own leaders.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Live Security Virtual Conference
> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's
> security and
> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can
> respond. Discussions
> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the
> latest in malware
> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
> _______________________________________________
> Gramps-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Is there a problem with Gramps backups (.gpkg files)?

Doug
I'm not sure I fully understand.
What is the recommended procedure for upgrading from 3.4.0
to 3.4.1? -
(1) Make a 3.4.0 gpkg only as a last-ditch protection
against contingencies
(2) Otherwise open the 3.4.0 family tree directly in 3.4.1
(3) Make the backups as 3.4.1 gpkgs from there

Doug




On 25/09/12 10:14, jerome wrote:

>> if I understand Benny's note correctly, there may be
>> something wrong with the XML backups or the import process.
>
> It was a more general (.gramps and .gpkg) and a more critical issue, fixed on 3.4.1! If you have set a prefered spouse or have specific order of children into a family, you could have a problem if you have created a new family tree from a backup generated by Gramps 3.4.0... No problem by using the Family Tree generated into Gramps 3.4.0, with Gramps 3.4.1.
>
> No records have been lost but custom seizures could have been modified ! :(
>
> "The prefered spouse" is rather a "display" option: a cosmetic issue.
> The children order into a family is the critical issue (file generated by Gramps 3.4.0) and it is very difficult to find good rules for batch changes. Human choice is maybe the best !
>
> The problem was related to a new feature added into Gramps 3.4.x, which allow us to see changes with a consistent "skeleton/structure" of data for Gramps XML. Good point was that devs also fixed some issues by testing this feature. Bad point was that we do not needed it on family's internal references ... Note, current Gramps XML file format could be also used for synchronization[1] (like .csv file format but with a better ID handling and currently more data)! So, the backup has tried to be more accessible and useful as a file storage, on the other hand we missed to test some import into new major release (3.4.0), most have been done on devel version: this could be a problem on major migrations.
>
> Note, if you find a problem on family's references (prefered spouse, order of children), maybe to look at previous backups (3.3.x) and last one (3.4.1) and family table. Maybe by Renaming a copy of your .gramps to .gz or gpkg to tar.gz (not certain???); or try the script[2].
>
> That's annoying, but it was one of the critical issue fixed between 3.4.0 and 3.4.1...
>
> [1] http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=GEPS_009:_Import_Export_Merge#Current_Related_Files
> [2] http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/images/3/3c/Gramps2xml.gz
>
> --- En date de : Lun 24.9.12, Ron Johnson <[hidden email]> a écrit :
>
>> De: Ron Johnson <[hidden email]>
>> Objet: Re: [Gramps-users] Is there a problem with Gramps backups (.gpkg files)?
>> À: [hidden email]
>> Date: Lundi 24 septembre 2012, 18h51
>> On 09/24/2012 10:46 AM, sturdy
>> wrote:
>>> I have recently updated from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1 after
>> making .gpkg backups. But,
>>> if I understand Benny's note correctly, there may be
>> something wrong with
>>> the XML backups or the import process. My backups
>> appear to be okay but can
>>> you tell me what I should be checking to identify a
>> potential problem? TIA
>>>
>>
>> I had trouble with JPGs and TIFFs that I'd renamed in the
>> file system but
>> not in Gramps, which then royally barfed on "restore"
>> because I hadn't also
>> renamed them w/in Gramps.
>>
>> --
>> If adults of legally sound mind must be told what foods
>> they
>> are not allowed to buy, then those people are not competent
>> to choose (i.e. vote for) their own leaders.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Live Security Virtual Conference
>> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's
>> security and
>> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can
>> respond. Discussions
>> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the
>> latest in malware
>> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gramps-users mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Live Security Virtual Conference
> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
> _______________________________________________
> Gramps-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Is there a problem with Gramps backups (.gpkg files)?

Pat Clark
On 09/26/2012 04:07 AM, doug wrote:

> I'm not sure I fully understand.
> What is the recommended procedure for upgrading from 3.4.0
> to 3.4.1? -
> (1) Make a 3.4.0 gpkg only as a last-ditch protection
> against contingencies
> (2) Otherwise open the 3.4.0 family tree directly in 3.4.1
> (3) Make the backups as 3.4.1 gpkgs from there
>
> Doug
>
>
That's what I did, and it worked for me.
I run linux so I upgraded using the .deb file.
But I don't see why it shouldn't work when upgrading a windows system.

Pat

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Is there a problem with Gramps backups (.gpkg files)?

Ron Johnson
On 09/25/2012 08:03 PM, Pat Clark wrote:
[snip]
> That's what I did, and it worked for me.
> I run linux so I upgraded using the .deb file.
> But I don't see why it shouldn't work when upgrading a windows system.

Because Microsoft is Eeeeeeeeeevvvvvvvviiiiiiiillllllll-lllll.

--
If adults of legally sound mind must be told what foods they
are not allowed to buy, then those people are not competent
to choose (i.e. vote for) their own leaders.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Is there a problem with Gramps backups (.gpkg files)?

Benny Malengier
In reply to this post by Pat Clark


2012/9/26 Pat Clark <[hidden email]>
On 09/26/2012 04:07 AM, doug wrote:
> I'm not sure I fully understand.
> What is the recommended procedure for upgrading from 3.4.0
> to 3.4.1? -
> (1) Make a 3.4.0 gpkg only as a last-ditch protection
> against contingencies
> (2) Otherwise open the 3.4.0 family tree directly in 3.4.1
> (3) Make the backups as 3.4.1 gpkgs from there
>
> Doug
>
>
That's what I did, and it worked for me.

Yes, and it is the correct approach. Do contingency planning. Because of the law of Murphy, if you do that, then opening the old family tree will not cause problems. Should you not have done the backup, only then will you have problems and need the backups :-)

Benny

I run linux so I upgraded using the .deb file.
But I don't see why it shouldn't work when upgrading a windows system.

Pat

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Is there a problem with Gramps backups (.gpkg files)?

Doug
On 26/09/12 08:37, Benny Malengier wrote:

>
>
> 2012/9/26 Pat Clark <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>
>     On 09/26/2012 04:07 AM, doug wrote:
>      > I'm not sure I fully understand.
>      > What is the recommended procedure for upgrading from
>     3.4.0
>      > to 3.4.1? -
>      > (1) Make a 3.4.0 gpkg only as a last-ditch protection
>      > against contingencies
>      > (2) Otherwise open the 3.4.0 family tree directly in
>     3.4.1
>      > (3) Make the backups as 3.4.1 gpkgs from there
>      >
>      > Doug
>      >
>      >
>     That's what I did, and it worked for me.
>
>
> Yes, and it is the correct approach. Do contingency
> planning. Because of the law of Murphy, if you do that, then
> opening the old family tree will not cause problems. Should
> you not have done the backup, only then will you have
> problems and need the backups :-)
>
> Benny
>
>     I run linux so I upgraded using the .deb file.
>     But I don't see why it shouldn't work when upgrading a
>     windows system.
>
>     Pat

Thanks. I'm running LMDE, so the .deb file should be OK for me

Doug


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Loading...