I saw that a critical fix for 6.01 came out today but haven’t found it yet in the download area. Meantime, my users are complaining that archiving is no longer working under 6.0.
Does anyone know what bugs were introduced with 6.01 that makes this critical fix necessary and if it’s safe to load without it? I read the fix list but couldn’t tell if the fixes apply to bugs only found in 6.01 or if they are in 6.0 as well.
Thanks,
Beth Villanyi
Subject: Is 6.01 safe to implement without critical fix?
See details of bug fixes here at link below: NAB Corruption one reason for the fix
http://www-10.lotus.com/ldd/r5fixlist.nsf/Progress/601%20CF1?OpenDocument
Subject: RE: Is 6.01 safe to implement without critical fix?
Yes, I saw that, but it doesn’t say if that’s in R6.0 or only introduced in 6.01.
Also, assuming it was only introduced in 6.01, does it affect everybody and if so, does that mean if you load 6.01 your NAB is immediately corrupted and you’re hosed? Or is it something that only affects certain types of installations and therefore some people are successfully running 6.01?
These answers would obviously affect my decision to load 6.01 or not.
Thanks,
Beth Villanyi
Subject: RE: Is 6.01 safe to implement without critical fix?
Beth, there’s more to this than the bald statement about ‘NAB corruption’ in the CF1 listing (but I don’t know what it is…).
We’ve been on 6.0.1 for two weeks, with people at least reading the NAB (with 6.0.1 template, of course), with no problem. It would be nice if these SPRs would have some detail, like what circumstances cause the issue. (Heck, they have to have that, since they have to duplicate before they can fix it! 
Anyway, it’s obviously not ‘load 6.0.0 or 6.0.1 and you are hosed’. We ran 6.0.0 on two development machines since January, with no NAB issues.
Of course, you might have the problem… without more data, we don’t know what causes the problem.
Anyone out there even seen this one in the flesh?
(Added: Oops… I was reading the above note and not the CF1 SPR… as Stephen says, it refers to R6 client and R5 server/NAB. But, in any case, I ran that combination since more than a year ago (after LS 2002?) with no problems either.)
Lee Sweet
PCLP R5 SA
CLP ND6 SA
Subject: RE: Is 6.01 safe to implement without critical fix?
Search in the forum if you’re interested in what might cause the NAB corruption - it’s been heavily debated for quite a while. I don’t believe any definite conclusion was ever reached, but obviously the Lotus developers figured it out and fixed it.
The practical upshot is that if you’re going to run that particular configuration, then you will need the CF1 patch, regardless of what causes the problem.
Stephen Lister
Subject: RE: Is 6.01 safe to implement without critical fix?
If you read it carefully, you’ll notice that it refers to corruption of the R5 NAB, when accessed by an R6 client - something that has been discussed to death here on the forum. So upgrading to either version isn’t going to hose your system unless you’re planning on only upgrading the clients.
Stephen Lister
Subject: RE: Is 6.01 safe to implement without critical fix?
There have been rumours of this problem since the beta days.I guess it’s been hard to reproduce until recently, so now they’re putting in a fix.
The vast majority of people, including myself, have used by 6.0 and 6.0.1 clients without any effect on a R5 infrastructure.
Luke