Or copied?
Correct. After install I had to download all the plugins, help tips on rack start were enabled, etc.
1 Like
So true, just wasn’t used to VCV being frustrating. I have made my mistake jumping at the new update on day one. Will not happen again.
4 Likes
Dave’s observed behavior is consistent with the rename to move the user folder failing.
To my mind this move was not the best idea.
The current usage of the Rack User folder isn’t quite right. Plugins do belong in appdata, but recordings, samples, patches, selections, are all user data that are appropriate for Documents in the user profile (and probably the Rack settings and log as well).
Browsing around in appdata for my stuff is weird. Everything under there is generally ugly app internals, which is the intended usage for that folder.
9 Likes
now that is how it should be done, send that to support, so they can change that rename stuff and also that only the plugin folder(s) get moved.
2 Likes
any ETA for this being fixed/re-released!? Andrew…!? thank you.
the salty to be downtalked user again:
V 2.5.1 is out…
Still any Crashes on Mac Intel/ ARM?
Do not want to be the first to roll back !!!
1 Like
Midi Mapping crash is fixed, as is the cable color one. So far no crashes on the M1 Mini in native mode (Rack Pro arm64). Just be aware that once you update Rack 2.4.1 won’t log in anymore so if pro, no licenses get downloaded and it won’t start, even if you create a link to the moved Rack 2 user folder in your Documents folder, You’d have to uninstall 2.5.1 and reinstall 2.4.1 if for some reason you need to roll back.
So far so good though with 2.5.1…
1 Like
the salty to be downtalked user again:
Does this mean that I have to download all the licenses for 2.5.1 manually? Or only the 2.4.1 licenses when I need to rollback because of other reasons?
Assuming the license thing is because of Rack moving the user folders (licenses are kept there), you can probably work around this by archiving your user folder before installing 2.5.
Then, to keep the 2.5 install from still trying to move the old user folder, put it in a non-default location, and use the -u command line option to point to the non-default location when your run the old rack.
Wouldn’t it be nice if the install gave an option to install the new rack side-by-side with the old one. There are lots of programs that provide for side-by-side installation of multiple versions. It’s a nice thing to do for users so that a stable working environment is guaranteed.
3 Likes
Indeed, that’s how it always worked until now. Breaking previous versions is really poor form even when there are no show stopping bugs.
1 Like
no, I think that 2.4.1 just does not follow the link to the linked dir I made into my Doc folder (for testing). 2.5.1 will read from the moved folder so no additional downloading needed (though there is a new version of the recorder for 2.5.1 to download if you use it)
yes, you would need to make a full copy into documents folder if 2.4.1 needs to be working, links don’t work
What I suggest is using a real folder (not a symlink) and passing -u <folder> on the command line for one of the versions of Rack. You’ll also need to copy the complete Rack install folder to another folder if you want to maintain running two different versions (including CPU variants).
(Note to self: After I return from ContinuuCon, write up a tech note outlining how to maintain multiple versions of Rack on a machine, and create a wiki of some kind for Rack tech notes).
1 Like
nope, just rename the executable (append 241 to the name for example) for it to not be overwritten
If you do that then you’re sharing a bunch of things across versions that probably shouldn’t be shared. Better to use a complete copy of the entire folder. Easily done by renaming the folder from Rack2 to Rack241 (for example) before installing the update.
no, copy the doc folder back to documents and 241 will use that and 251 the one that was moved to app data
I reread the code that does the folder move, so it looks like that should be ok. This works for keeping the 2.41 version around alongside 2.51 and future versions updated in-place. It’s not a general solution for running multiple versions of Rack in isolation.
Rack will move only when the new location hasn’t been created yet. (at my first glance at 2.5, it seemed like it would always move the old folder if it existed - I probably misread that).
If the User folder move fails, Rack assumes it’s a permissions issue in the message it shows, which isn’t always the cause for the failure. It’s like some old Windows apps that would tell you that every failure was “Out of Memory”, no matter what the actual cause of the issue may have been.
Yeah, the message should probably be more generic, such as “Could not move folder X to Y during upgrade, please contact VCV support.”, since there can be like 10 different reasons the move might fail.
Hope 2.5.1 is stable now so it’s safe to upgrade…
You can just create a topic in here and make it a wiki. Now everyone can update the first post.
I don’t know how to create a Wiki here. I don’t see anything in menus or the message editor, or an area of this site that is intentionally a knowledge base. What’s the gesture to do that?