Issue 111704 - Shared BASIC modules can be edited / Yield unexpected errormessage
Summary: Shared BASIC modules can be edited / Yield unexpected errormessage
Status: CLOSED WONT_FIX
Alias: None
Product: General
Classification: Code
Component: code (show other issues)
Version: DEV300m77
Hardware: All All
: P3 Trivial (vote)
Target Milestone: OOo 3.3
Assignee: joerg.skottke
QA Contact: issues@framework
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2010-05-19 11:42 UTC by joerg.skottke
Modified: 2010-07-07 06:16 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Issue Type: DEFECT
Latest Confirmation in: ---
Developer Difficulty: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this issue.
Description joerg.skottke 2010-05-19 11:42:07 UTC
The fix for issue 111453 uncovered a problem that shared modules can be edited.
This appears to work until the user tries to close the application, in this
instant an errormessage appears warning about not being able to write the changes.
Comment 1 ab 2010-05-19 14:45:05 UTC
ab->jsk: According to my tests and as described in issue 111453
shared modules usually are *not* editable. The only problem that
has been uncovered is the fact that modules that have been made
read only on file system level still can be edited. But users
can cause any kind of damage to the Office installation on file
system level. We have no chance to handle all this.

Please give a step by step description how to run into this pro-
blem without manipulations on file system level. Otherwise I see
this as P4/OOo Later or even WONTFIX.
Comment 2 joerg.skottke 2010-05-20 07:14:20 UTC
jsk->ab: I agree with you in so far as the file access rights have indeed been modified in an 
unusual way. And this is not an error we have to handle, really.

However, what confuses me is the fact that we even try to write the library on program exit. 
And this appears to happen no matter if the library has been modified or not. This shows that 
the office has no idea what state the library is in.

So this is really about having an unclean library management, the design (if there has ever been 
one) is broken. Even though i can easily imagine how this happened i do not necessarily have 
to agree with the way things have been implemented, it's unclean.
Comment 3 ab 2010-05-28 11:34:40 UTC
ab->jsk: I still miss a clear description what a user has to to
to get a problem. The step by step list from issue 111453 is
not acceptable as it includes manipulations on file system
level. Concerning the modification problem, we already have
issue i104876. Please check if this is a duplicate.
Comment 4 joerg.skottke 2010-07-07 06:15:45 UTC
Don't want this issue, closing.
Comment 5 joerg.skottke 2010-07-07 06:16:09 UTC
.