[Lazarus] Lazarus shortcuts conflict with windows shortcuts

[Jürgen Hestermann]

Am 2012-08-15 17:50, schrieb Martin:
 > The latest installer eve warns you, if you try to install (windows) multiple copies (which is one known cause for config issues)

Ok. That's nice.


 >> The reason for breaking things was not that I used snapshots. The same would have happened for an official release. It is a kinda "design flaw".
 > Are you sure? Some of the issues that caused errors when upgrading to a snapshot, where fixed in the RC1 installer (again windows)

Hmm. No, of course I am not sure because I don't know about these details. I was just assuming that *this* kind of data handling does not change within snapshots in a different way as in official releases. I understood the snapshot warning more in respect to my compiled programs (which may not run as expected). But of course, if such fundamental things change too then it may fail.

Nevertheless, the original thread was about hot key conflicts and this discussion about installs only began because I was adviced to change my settings and I only wanted to point out that this is not so easy when using multiple installations on multiple machines. To sync all of them without the hassle of manual config change I have to copy the config file. And for this purpose I need to know details. And having all settings in one (or two) config file and no config file with the same name in the install dir would help very much here.


 >> It seems that you miss the whole point. Tell me *any* reason to have multiple versions of the same (config) file? I can't think of any.
 > There are 2 reasons for this primary/secondary conf
 > 1st reason)  the secondary (exe dir) is used as a template, if no primary exists yet.

Then it is very confusing to give it the same name as a currently used config file. As already mentioned it should be renamed to avoid any confusion.


 > 2nd reason) 0.9.26 and before actually stored all config in the exe dir
 > So if a user upgrades from 0.9.26 to 1.0 (or any other version, including future). Then his old config must be moved. This is currently happening.
 > This is the reason the installer needs to ask.

Understand.


 >> I only expect one config file (for each purpose) and not many where all except one are dummies.
 > Actually, it is a template.
 > But if you upgrade from 0.9.26, then it is a real config, and will be moved (actually copied)

But that's the source of confusion: The installer cannot tell whether an environmentoptions.xml in the install dir (from previous installs) is a template or a working config file. If the template name would have been named differently (by versions later than 0.9.26) then this would have been clear. On the other hand this may be more programming work on the installer and the IDE (I don't know).