shared folder does not reappear on reinstall of gshare

[Martin G Miller]

If gshare is installed and creates the shared folder and then gshare is uninstalled from the synaptic package manager and the shared folder is deleted, and then gshare is reinstalled from the .deb file, the shared folder does not reappear. It can be dragged out of the trash and will appear on the network.

[Celso Pinto (cpinto)]

Thanks for your bug. I'm having problems replicating this. Which version of gshare are you using? 0.91?

[Martin G Miller (mgmiller)]

yes I installed gshare_0.91-1_i386.deb

[Martin G Miller (mgmiller)]

The only other thing I did was after the shared folder was created, I applied an emblem of "shared" from the properties menu before I deleted the folder.

[Celso Pinto (cpinto)]

Martin, the only reason I see for this to happen is that the sharing service is still running when you uninstall the package and you remove the directory.

If you try to access the shared folder from another computer you'll get an invalid path error.

After reinstalling the package, the daemon will still be running so if you start it again, the second instance detects that another gshared is running and terminates. So the Shared Files folder isn't created. Yet, if you logout of your session and login again, the Shared Folder should be created because the original service is restarted.

Of course, this just lays out what happens behind the scenes, logging out is no solution. The thing you should do instead is go to System/Preferences/File Sharing, disable the service and apply the changes. Then reopen the File Sharing preferences dialog and enable the service again. This time around the folder should be recreated.

Please mind that version 0.91 does have some issues regarding stopping the service, but I've made some changes for the next release that will fix this.

Also, I'll try to think of a way of stopping the sharing service when a user uninstalls the package.

Because of this, I'll mark this bug as 'fix committed'. If this still happens with the future release (0.92) please feel free to reopen this bug report.