4.5d Search issues

[jhamill]

anyone having any search problems? we've just upgraded and now the basic search within contacts/accounts etc always returns a full list whatever search contraint is applied.

the advanced search seems to work just fine in firefox browsers.

neither basic search or advanced searched is working in IE browsers here. We've got about 15 users on sugar which we upgraded to the 4.5d version today and none of the IE users basic/advance is working. the global search is working.

john

[jmmorale]

anyone having any search problems? we've just upgraded and now the basic search within contacts/accounts etc always returns a full list whatever search contraint is applied.

the advanced search seems to work just fine in firefox browsers.

neither basic search or advanced searched is working in IE browsers here. We've got about 15 users on sugar which we upgraded to the 4.5d version today and none of the IE users basic/advance is working. the global search is working.

john

Hi

I'm having the same problem, ¿how did you resolved it?.
Thank's
Mauricio.

[wtavares]

A have got too the same problem.
Can you help us?

Thank you

Welson Tavares

[jhamill]

A have got too the same problem.
Can you help us?

Thank you

Welson Tavares

I compared the files before and after the upgrade using diff on the whole folder structure (linux) and then worked out which ones were "wrong' and put back the files that came up with the search mising. it was only a few.

john

[sunside]

Hi there,

I am doing pre-tests for an upgrade from 4.2.0d to 4.5.0h, but after applying the two upgrade patches, I am encountering the same problem in my test install.

But the solution of jhamill doesn't sound at all what i am looking for... why should I overwrite any files by an old version to fix a bug? how do i know that I'm not breaking anything else by doing that? And of course, comparing what files have changed would give me about all Sugar files, since an upgrade from 4.2.0d changes a little more than just going from 4.5.0c to 4.5.0d.

So - does anyone have a solution to this bug?

Cheers
Sunside

Edit: I found a solution. It helped to overwrite the respective module's SearchForm.html with a fresh version from the full install package. Thanks to the poster in this thread:
http://www.sugarcrm.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17744

[ruchida]

Hi there,

I am doing pre-tests for an upgrade from 4.2.0d to 4.5.0h, but after applying the two upgrade patches, I am encountering the same problem in my test install.

But the solution of jhamill doesn't sound at all what i am looking for... why should I overwrite any files by an old version to fix a bug? how do i know that I'm not breaking anything else by doing that? And of course, comparing what files have changed would give me about all Sugar files, since an upgrade from 4.2.0d changes a little more than just going from 4.5.0c to 4.5.0d.

So - does anyone have a solution to this bug?

Cheers
Sunside

Hi

I think some files that should be overwritten by 4.5.0h are not overwritten and still those of 4.2.0d. At the Preflight check stage, please make sure to click the "Show Files Requiring Manual Merge" and confirm those files are checked.

If this is not the case, some relationships may not be correctly configured. Try to go to Admin and execute Repair Relationship.

[matbru]

For example, within the /SUGAR/modules/<enter_module_name>/SearchForm.html, when looking at the html code, the name value for Account Name should look like:

name="name_basic"

You may need to add the "_basic" to the name fields for the basic search form.

I will attach a stock SearchForm as an example.

Hope this helps,

[DeDe]

We are on 4.5.0h but we're also having this problem. I diff'd SearchForm.html on a fresh install and on an upgraded version, and I saw no differences. Is there any other files I should check?

[matbru]

DeDe, have you tried to add the _Basic after the name fields for Basic Search?
We have also 4.5.0h and it works well now.

BR Matthias

[DeDe]

matbru, we did try that and it didn't work. We finally just replace the whole module with a stock version and it worked. Brute force method, but it got it to work.