Build: 2000121514, Mac OS 9.0 To reproduce: * Install and run Mozilla. * Find the `Mozilla Registry' file. Where it is: * System Folder:Preferences:Mozilla Registry Where it should be: * System Folder:Application Support:Mozilla:Component Registry
Arguable. Preference folder is per user, I assume application support is not. Presumably different users can have different registered modules. If all users use sane moz moudles and thus config file should be in application support folder, is valid bug, ows. is perhaps invalid. Answer is - can different users have different moz modules registered?
<p class=iirc> The theory is that you can indeed have different components installed. However, I thought you could have a default moz registry near the app that defines what is available to everyone, and then another registry that is per user. </p>
Yes, good point. Mozilla Registry is the per user file in the preferences folder, and Component Registry is the file in the same folder as Mozilla that defines which components are installed. Component Registry should probably stay where it is or move to Essential Files or Components to unclutter the top level Mozilla folder. I see no benefit of moving it to Application Support, it just makes Mozilla harder to uninstall (you can't just trash the folder) and makes it harder to have multiple mozilla's installed at once. Mozilla Registry should similarly remain in Preferences since I think it defines where the Mozilla User Profiles are installed for each Mac OS User. (Since multiple mac os users could all have multiple different private mozilla profiles). The only thing I think you'd want to place in Application Support is the hypothetical "XPToolkit Registry" if such a file ever came to exist. This would share information between multiple XpToolkit apps. WONTFIX unless Mathew has a counter argument?
Ok, if Mozilla Registry is per-user, this is invalid. Thanks for the explanations.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 19 years ago
Resolution: --- → INVALID
The tree may still be red because it missed the checkin, or it could be because that was not the problem, or it could be because my removal of '&' which is in this patch, was not applied.
Sorry, this comment hit the wrong bug.
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.