Upgraded from 2000 to 2003 outlook, distribution lists are empty

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Cindy B - 11 May 2005 18:33 GMT

After upgrading from 2000 to 2003 outlook on an XP box, the user mentioned
that his previously populated distribution lists existed, but had no
entries - the list was empty. I did not copy, move, or export all or any
portion of the in use pst file. Is this a symptom of an error on my part
during the upgrade? Is there a way to avoid this? If it's just a fact of
life with an upgrade, can the lists be moved/copied/exported first or
recovered/imported after the fact?

I have another issue which is similar and may be answered with a reply to
the above question, but just in case:
I replaced a faulty hdd and then upgraded from 2000 to 2003 outlook (on an
XP box) before opening outlook for the first time. The user overwrote the
default outlook.pst file with a known good pst file which was exported (off
the old hdd) from an upgraded 2000 to 2003 version of outlook . All contacts
came through, but the distribution lists are gone - not just unpopulated,
but non-existent.

Thanks for any assistance you can provide.

Reply to this Message

Russ Valentine [MVP-Outlook] - 11 May 2005 23:28 GMT

Exporting a PST file will always lose DL's.
How exactly did you migrate your Outlook data?
I never trust in place upgrades of Office.
It is far better to back up data, then do a clean installation and
configuration of Office.

Signature

Russ Valentine
[MVP-Outlook]

> After upgrading from 2000 to 2003 outlook on an XP box, the user mentioned
> that his previously populated distribution lists existed, but had no
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
>
> Thanks for any assistance you can provide.

Reply to this Message

Cindy B - 13 May 2005 15:32 GMT

Russ,
In the first instance, as I previously stated, the data *was not* moved,
copied or exported. Despite your feelings about an inplace upgrade, that's
what was done and I need to know if there is a solution to my current
issues. Giving me your opinion after the fact doesn't help with the
situation at hand. In my case, I will be using this inplace upgrade method
again as it is the only option I've been povided by the cmpany for migrating
from OL 2000 to OL 2003. Given that information (not that it should matter
just to get my questions answered) what can I do to prevent this from
happening in the future?

In the second instance, the pst file was copied, not exported (I apologize
for my incorrect verbage) from the old hdd after OL was upgraded to 2003. OL
was upgraded after a clean install of Office 2000, then immediately ugraded
OL 2003, without it even being opened, if that makes a difference at all.
Wouldn't that mean there was nothing to corrupt or 'lose'?

Regards,
Cindy

> Exporting a PST file will always lose DL's.
> How exactly did you migrate your Outlook data?
[quoted text clipped - 21 lines]
> >
> > Thanks for any assistance you can provide.

Reply to this Message

Russ Valentine [MVP-Outlook] - 14 May 2005 00:10 GMT

DL's are extremely fragile and unreliable. I agree that an in-place upgrade
should have worked, but it does not surprise me in the least to see a DL go
south when you do. The solution is the same as always: restore from backup.
You should always backup data before an upgrade. Doing an in-place upgrade
should work fine as long as you create a backup of your data. That way if
you run into any problems like this with the new installation you can then
create a new profile that uses your backup file.
The only other thing you can try now is to run the Inbox Repair Tool on your
PST file, but I'm not optimistic.

Overwriting a PST file is the worst thing you can do. It will corrupt your
profile every time. Here is the way to migrate Outlook data:
http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/assistance/HA010771141033.aspx

Signature

Russ Valentine
[MVP-Outlook]

> Russ,
> In the first instance, as I previously stated, the data *was not* moved,
[quoted text clipped - 53 lines]
>> >
>> > Thanks for any assistance you can provide.

Reply to this Message

Cindy B - 16 May 2005 23:01 GMT

Thank you. That was helpful and will continue to be as I upgrade others in
the company.
Also, it turns out, OL detected two locations where contacts were located.
From what the user told me, it sounds like either the properties of contacts
or of that users profile had two paths...which of course it couldn't read at
the same time. One of those had the DL's. I assume the reason this happened
was because of the improper way the pst file was put back into the OL
directory, instead of using the open data option through OL.

Thanks again.

> DL's are extremely fragile and unreliable. I agree that an in-place upgrade
> should have worked, but it does not surprise me in the least to see a DL go
[quoted text clipped - 67 lines]
> >> >
> >> > Thanks for any assistance you can provide.

Reply to this Message

Russ Valentine [MVP-Outlook] - 16 May 2005 23:24 GMT

Most likely. I've never seen the upgrade process do any damage to a PST
file.
Unfortunately, I've seen DL's become corrupt seemingly for no reason at all.

Signature

Russ Valentine
[MVP-Outlook]

> Thank you. That was helpful and will continue to be as I upgrade others in
> the company.
[quoted text clipped - 100 lines]
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks for any assistance you can provide.

Reply to this Message