Am I mistaken, or did Google just release 5.2 for the GB-1001?

[Lonekazoo]

Before I get too excited, has anyone performed the upgrade on a 1001
yet?

Merry Christmas to you too, Google!

[Joe D'Andrea]

On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 4:42 PM, Lonekazoo <lone...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Before I get too excited, has anyone performed the upgrade on a 1001 yet?

I will be ... tonight!

https://support.google.com/enterprise/doc/gsa/00/update_index_page.html

"Update to Version 5.2.0.G24 for Google Search Appliance GB-1001"

:-D

--
Joe D'Andrea
Liquid Joe LLC
www.liquidjoe.biz
+1 (908) 781-0323

[Joe D'Andrea]

On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 4:46 PM, Joe D'Andrea <jdan...@gmail.com> wrote:

> https://support.google.com/enterprise/doc/gsa/00/update_index_page.html
>
> "Update to Version 5.2.0.G24 for Google Search Appliance GB-1001"
>
> :-D

Whoops - not so fast. I have 5.0.4.G22, but the above list only
mentions 5.0.4.G24, 5.0.4.G16 and 5.0.0.G14 as prerequisites. Perhaps
they meant 5.0.4.G22. Hmm ...

- Joe

[Mahesh T]

I have opened a ticket on this and I just got a reply from support -

There's a typo in documentation at URL
https://support.google.com/enterprise/doc/gsa/update_inst/update_520G24_ext_O.html
and a documentation bug as already been opened #1558776.
Meaning that you shouldn't update to 5.0.4.G.24 since it's a cluster
only version and you if you're running 5.0.4.G22 / 5.0.4.G22 VM Patch
#1 / 5.0.4.G16 / 5.0.0.G14, you're safe to install 5.2.0.G.24

[Joe D'Andrea]

On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 3:54 AM, Mahesh T <light...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I have opened a ticket on this and I just got a reply from support -
>

> There's a typo in documentation ...

Ditto on response - good! Proceeding with the install.

- Joe

[sdenn]

Did you applu the patch? How did it go?

On Dec 23 2008, 4:36 am, "Joe D'Andrea" <jdand...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Joe D'Andrea]

On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 4:49 PM, sdenn <Sarah...@netscout.com> wrote:
>
> Did you apply the patch? How did it go?

It went well!

Only one gripe: The new (default) XSLT is peppered with attributes
that render any HTML 4.x and XHTML 1.x output invalid. This will make
my revisions to the Multifunction Stylesheet[1] most interesting. :)

Ahh well. Short of altering the DTD from within or outside of the GSA
response[2] (which has its own validation challenges), s'more creative
JavaScript workarounds are in my future!

--
Joe D'Andrea
Liquid Joe LLC
www.liquidjoe.biz
+1 (908) 781-0323

[1] http://code.google.com/p/gsa-xhtml-stylesheet/
[2] http://www.alistapart.com/articles/customdtd/

[kevin....@dts.ca.gov]

Joe,
Do existing Multifunction Stylesheets or XHTML Stylesheets still work
without modification?

Kevin

On Jan 13, 2:01 pm, "Joe D'Andrea" <jdand...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Joe D'Andrea]

On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 12:01 PM, <kevin....@dts.ca.gov> wrote:

> Do existing Multifunction Stylesheets or XHTML Stylesheets still work
> without modification?

Yes, they'll work. The only catch is they won't support features new
to 5.2 that involve XSLT mods.

Well ... not yet anyway. ;)

- Joe

[kevin....@dts.ca.gov]

From the scents emanating from the cellar, I'd say Joe is cooking up
some new XSLT brew...

On Jan 15, 6:22 am, "Joe D'Andrea" <jdand...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Joe D'Andrea]

On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 5:10 PM, <kevin....@dts.ca.gov> wrote:
>
> From the scents emanating from the cellar, I'd say Joe is cooking up
> some new XSLT brew...

With just a _hint_ of Yuengling.

Well ... that's what's in the ice box, so make of that what you will. ;)

- Joe

[sdenn]

I applied that patch here but found issues. Our database feeds
suddenly started failing, our crawl count was half what it was prior
to the patch, and suddenly our sharepoint environment began to crash
with memory leak errors. Not sure whether the memory leak issues are
self inflicted or not, but the other problems are definately new to
the patch.

We also notices that our connector crawls the robots.txt file every
hald hour whether the crawl is running or not...this may be normal but
just something else i noted after the patch.



On Jan 13, 5:01 pm, "Joe D'Andrea" <jdand...@gmail.com> wrote: