Re: Debian's glacial movement--a rant
Harry Rickards wrote: On 12 May 2009, at 07:42, JoeHill wrote: Freddy Freeloader wrote: Just an update on this. I have asked on #gnucash if the patch for this bug can be backported to 2.2.6 upstream and they say this is a Debian problem as it is fixed in Gnucash. They will not do anything to help. Here's the short conversation from #gnucash. * Now talking on #gnucash * Topic for #gnucash is: Free GPL Personal and Small Business Accounting || Please don't ask to ask, just ask and wait! || publically-logged channel || latest stable: 2.2.9 * Topic for #gnucash set by jsled at Wed May 6 07:46:39 2009 Is it possible to have the patch for bug #564928 backported to 2.2.6? I have all my business records in gnucash and this bug crashes gnucash every time I start it. I run Debian and who knows how long it will take for Debian to catch up. Right now they are almost a year behind in version numbers. * twunder (~twun...@pool-96-234-154-75.bltmmd.fios.verizon.net) has joined #gnucash * warlord-afk is now known as warlord garyk: you need to ask that of Debian. The GnuCash releases dont have the bug. * warlord is now known as warlord-afk The Debian devs say it needs to be done upstream as they won't/can't backport the patch. That's why I asked here. This looks to be the classic answer given by my stepkids when they were growing up and didn't want to take responsibility for anything: Who's responsible? Not me. Not me was responsible for everything done wrong in our house for a couple of years. I didn't know one person could get into that much mischief all their own. ;) Gnucash version 2.2.6 was released July 31, 2008. The fixed version of Gnucash, 2.2.9 was released February 4, 2009. It's now May 11, 2009 and counting. The patch for this critical bug was released 3 months ago and nothing has been done. It's now 5 weeks since I was told I was being a jerk for saying Debian was slow in moving on this as they were 3 versions, and 9 months, behind. Well, Debian is now 3 versions and 10 months behind, and the patch has been available for 120+ days while the bug has been archived in Debian since the day after it was reported. It couldn't be that this critical bug just isn't on anyone's list of priorities could it? There were a couple of suggestions made a while back. Just curious, did you try any of those? One was to build a patched version of Gnucash yourself, with a patch supplied by Florian Kulzer along with detailed instrucions on how to build. Another was to contact Debian backports and ask if anyone there would build a deb for you. -- J Sorry if I've got something wrong, I haven't been reading this thread in detail. But, does the OP just require someone to build a gnucash deb package for stable, with the version in unstable? Again, sorry if I'm completely wrong. Thanks Harry Rickards I don't think so, but I couldn't swear to that. I had one more message from "warlord" on #gnucash last night after I had sent the post to this list. He said that this bug is purely a Debian bug as it was a result of a patch the Debian devs created. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Debian's glacial movement--a rant
On 12 May 2009, at 07:42, JoeHill wrote: Freddy Freeloader wrote: Just an update on this. I have asked on #gnucash if the patch for this bug can be backported to 2.2.6 upstream and they say this is a Debian problem as it is fixed in Gnucash. They will not do anything to help. Here's the short conversation from #gnucash. * Now talking on #gnucash * Topic for #gnucash is: Free GPL Personal and Small Business Accounting || Please don't ask to ask, just ask and wait! || publically-logged channel || latest stable: 2.2.9 * Topic for #gnucash set by jsled at Wed May 6 07:46:39 2009 Is it possible to have the patch for bug #564928 backported to 2.2.6? I have all my business records in gnucash and this bug crashes gnucash every time I start it. I run Debian and who knows how long it will take for Debian to catch up. Right now they are almost a year behind in version numbers. * twunder (~twun...@pool-96-234-154-75.bltmmd.fios.verizon.net) has joined #gnucash * warlord-afk is now known as warlord garyk: you need to ask that of Debian. The GnuCash releases dont have the bug. * warlord is now known as warlord-afk The Debian devs say it needs to be done upstream as they won't/can't backport the patch. That's why I asked here. This looks to be the classic answer given by my stepkids when they were growing up and didn't want to take responsibility for anything: Who's responsible? Not me. Not me was responsible for everything done wrong in our house for a couple of years. I didn't know one person could get into that much mischief all their own. ;) Gnucash version 2.2.6 was released July 31, 2008. The fixed version of Gnucash, 2.2.9 was released February 4, 2009. It's now May 11, 2009 and counting. The patch for this critical bug was released 3 months ago and nothing has been done. It's now 5 weeks since I was told I was being a jerk for saying Debian was slow in moving on this as they were 3 versions, and 9 months, behind. Well, Debian is now 3 versions and 10 months behind, and the patch has been available for 120+ days while the bug has been archived in Debian since the day after it was reported. It couldn't be that this critical bug just isn't on anyone's list of priorities could it? There were a couple of suggestions made a while back. Just curious, did you try any of those? One was to build a patched version of Gnucash yourself, with a patch supplied by Florian Kulzer along with detailed instrucions on how to build. Another was to contact Debian backports and ask if anyone there would build a deb for you. -- J Sorry if I've got something wrong, I haven't been reading this thread in detail. But, does the OP just require someone to build a gnucash deb package for stable, with the version in unstable? Again, sorry if I'm completely wrong. Thanks Harry Rickards -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Debian's glacial movement--a rant
Freddy Freeloader wrote: > Just an update on this. I have asked on #gnucash if the patch for this > bug can be backported to 2.2.6 upstream and they say this is a Debian > problem as it is fixed in Gnucash. They will not do anything to help. > > Here's the short conversation from #gnucash. > > * Now talking on #gnucash > * Topic for #gnucash is: Free GPL Personal and Small Business Accounting > || Please don't ask to ask, just ask and wait! || publically-logged > channel || latest stable: 2.2.9 > * Topic for #gnucash set by jsled at Wed May 6 07:46:39 2009 > Is it possible to have the patch for bug #564928 backported to > 2.2.6? I have all my business records in gnucash and this bug crashes > gnucash every time I start it. I run Debian and who knows how long it > will take for Debian to catch up. Right now they are almost a year > behind in version numbers. > * twunder (~twun...@pool-96-234-154-75.bltmmd.fios.verizon.net) has > joined #gnucash > * warlord-afk is now known as warlord > garyk: you need to ask that of Debian. The GnuCash releases > dont have the bug. > * warlord is now known as warlord-afk > The Debian devs say it needs to be done upstream as they > won't/can't backport the patch. That's why I asked here. > > > This looks to be the classic answer given by my stepkids when they were > growing up and didn't want to take responsibility for anything: Who's > responsible? Not me. Not me was responsible for everything done > wrong in our house for a couple of years. I didn't know one person could > get into that much mischief all their own. ;) > > Gnucash version 2.2.6 was released July 31, 2008. The fixed version of > Gnucash, 2.2.9 was released February 4, 2009. It's now May 11, 2009 and > counting. The patch for this critical bug was released 3 months ago and > nothing has been done. It's now 5 weeks since I was told I was being a > jerk for saying Debian was slow in moving on this as they were 3 > versions, and 9 months, behind. Well, Debian is now 3 versions and 10 > months behind, and the patch has been available for 120+ days while the > bug has been archived in Debian since the day after it was reported. > > It couldn't be that this critical bug just isn't on anyone's list of > priorities could it? There were a couple of suggestions made a while back. Just curious, did you try any of those? One was to build a patched version of Gnucash yourself, with a patch supplied by Florian Kulzer along with detailed instrucions on how to build. Another was to contact Debian backports and ask if anyone there would build a deb for you. -- J -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Debian's glacial movement--a rant
Freddy Freeloader wrote:
Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 01:06:00PM -0700, Freddy Freeloader wrote:
Michael Biebl wrote:
Freddy Freeloader wrote:
I'm experiencing a bug in Gnucash that appeared a couple of days
ago on my system that makes Gnucash completely unusable for me. I
turned in a bug report on Friday, checked on it yesterday, and by
today the bug had been blocked from being displayed. It could be
found by searching Debian's bug tracker, but only if you know the
bug id number. If you just search for bugs in Gnucash the bug does
not appear to exist.
The bug was closed, and blocked, because it's been fixed upstream
in version 2.2.9 which was released by Gnucash in February of this
year.
Could you discuss how you're experiencing a new bug ("appeared a couple
of days ago") if you're not using gnucach in a new way? I'm sure there
are bugs in every piece of software I use. There are a couple of which
I am aware (if I care to think on it) but I have work-arounds or I
wouldn't have accepted the software for use and would have chosen a
different solution. I've never run into the "appeared a couple of days
ago" situation where the problem was a new bug; the problem has always
been in a different system (or is upstream of the keyboard :))
Doug.
Sorry I didn't answer this sooner, but I just now saw your message.
I didn't change anything other than running an apt-get update &&
apt-get upgrade. I was using Gnucash in exactly the same way I had for
last the year. It just started crashing after that when I would close
a tab that was created automatically during creating and posting
vendor invoices or customer bills.
New bug or old bug I don't know. All I know was it was new to me as
I'd been using Gnucash for more than a year to keep track of my
business and suddenly it just didn't work correctly any more.
But, that's all right. Just keep on blaming me. I'm surely at fault.
Hell, I had only been using Gnucash for a year. An imbecile like me
couldn't possibly have developed a stable work flow in that amount of
time. I probably did things differently inside of Gnucash every day
for that entire year
Starting Gnucash and closing tabs inside it are such technically
challenging tasks that users have a very difficult time doing them
correctly and that most likely explains why Gnucash suddenly began to
fail to open account files at startup too. It's gotta be the stupid
user's fault.
Funny ain't it though how the upstream version, 2.2.9, has a bug fix
for this. I guess they call it the "stupid-user patch", and that's why
they won't backport the patch to 2.2.6.
Just an update on this. I have asked on #gnucash if the patch for this
bug can be backported to 2.2.6 upstream and they say this is a Debian
problem as it is fixed in Gnucash. They will not do anything to help.
Here's the short conversation from #gnucash.
* Now talking on #gnucash
* Topic for #gnucash is: Free GPL Personal and Small Business Accounting
|| Please don't ask to ask, just ask and wait! || publically-logged
channel || latest stable: 2.2.9
* Topic for #gnucash set by jsled at Wed May 6 07:46:39 2009
Is it possible to have the patch for bug #564928 backported to
2.2.6? I have all my business records in gnucash and this bug crashes
gnucash every time I start it. I run Debian and who knows how long it
will take for Debian to catch up. Right now they are almost a year
behind in version numbers.
* twunder (~twun...@pool-96-234-154-75.bltmmd.fios.verizon.net) has
joined #gnucash
* warlord-afk is now known as warlord
garyk: you need to ask that of Debian. The GnuCash releases
dont have the bug.
* warlord is now known as warlord-afk
The Debian devs say it needs to be done upstream as they
won't/can't backport the patch. That's why I asked here.
This looks to be the classic answer given by my stepkids when they were
growing up and didn't want to take responsibility for anything: Who's
responsible? Not me. Not me was responsible for everything done
wrong in our house for a couple of years. I didn't know one person could
get into that much mischief all their own. ;)
Gnucash version 2.2.6 was released July 31, 2008. The fixed version of
Gnucash, 2.2.9 was released February 4, 2009. It's now May 11, 2009 and
counting. The patch for this critical bug was released 3 months ago and
nothing has been done. It's now 5 weeks since I was told I was being a
jerk for saying Debian was slow in moving on this as they were 3
versions, and 9 months, behind. Well, Debian is now 3 versions and 10
months behind, and the patch has been available for 120+ days while the
bug has been archived in Debian since the day after it was reported.
It couldn't be that this critical bug just isn't on anyone's list of
priorities could it?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Debian's glacial movement--a rant
Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 01:06:00PM -0700, Freddy Freeloader wrote:
Michael Biebl wrote:
Freddy Freeloader wrote:
I'm experiencing a bug in Gnucash that appeared a couple of days ago on
my system that makes Gnucash completely unusable for me. I turned in a
bug report on Friday, checked on it yesterday, and by today the bug had
been blocked from being displayed. It could be found by searching
Debian's bug tracker, but only if you know the bug id number. If you
just search for bugs in Gnucash the bug does not appear to exist.
The bug was closed, and blocked, because it's been fixed upstream in
version 2.2.9 which was released by Gnucash in February of this year.
Could you discuss how you're experiencing a new bug ("appeared a couple
of days ago") if you're not using gnucach in a new way? I'm sure there
are bugs in every piece of software I use. There are a couple of which
I am aware (if I care to think on it) but I have work-arounds or I
wouldn't have accepted the software for use and would have chosen a
different solution. I've never run into the "appeared a couple of days
ago" situation where the problem was a new bug; the problem has always
been in a different system (or is upstream of the keyboard :))
Doug.
Sorry I didn't answer this sooner, but I just now saw your message.
I didn't change anything other than running an apt-get update && apt-get
upgrade. I was using Gnucash in exactly the same way I had for last the
year. It just started crashing after that when I would close a tab that
was created automatically during creating and posting vendor invoices or
customer bills.
New bug or old bug I don't know. All I know was it was new to me as I'd
been using Gnucash for more than a year to keep track of my business and
suddenly it just didn't work correctly any more.
But, that's all right. Just keep on blaming me. I'm surely at fault.
Hell, I had only been using Gnucash for a year. An imbecile like me
couldn't possibly have developed a stable work flow in that amount of
time. I probably did things differently inside of Gnucash every day for
that entire year
Starting Gnucash and closing tabs inside it are such technically
challenging tasks that users have a very difficult time doing them
correctly and that most likely explains why Gnucash suddenly began to
fail to open account files at startup too. It's gotta be the stupid
user's fault.
Funny ain't it though how the upstream version, 2.2.9, has a bug fix for
this. I guess they call it the "stupid-user patch", and that's why they
won't backport the patch to 2.2.6.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Debian's glacial movement--a rant
Freddy Freeloader wrote: > I've never been pissed off at Debian before but I guess there is always > a first. > > I'm experiencing a bug in Gnucash that appeared a couple of days ago on > my system that makes Gnucash completely unusable for me. I turned in a > bug report on Friday, checked on it yesterday, and by today the bug had > been blocked from being displayed. It could be found by searching > Debian's bug tracker, but only if you know the bug id number. If you > just search for bugs in Gnucash the bug does not appear to exist. > > The bug was closed, and blocked, because it's been fixed upstream in > version 2.2.9 which was released by Gnucash in February of this year. > > Great. The bug has been fixed. Why it needed to be hidden from being > displayed is puzzler for me, but that's the way it is. > > Now the bad news. > > Since Gnucash in both Sid and Sqeeze is now at version 2.2.6 I only have > to wait until Debian works through versions 2.2.7 and 2.2.8 before > Gnucash in Debian finally becomes usable for me again in version > 2.2.9. As Sid is "only" 9 months behind Gnucash's release schedule at > this point I guess the fact that all my business records for the last > couple of years are in Gnucash means I'll be able to start doing my > business accounting again sometime after the first of next year, at a > minimum, if I wait for Debian Things like this could be such a drag in the business environment. Normally, I suggest to start updating machine(s) when testing is in the "frozen" state. Then check if all the critical software is functioning as it should. If not, file relevant bugs immediately. That way, when a new stable version is released, you can be assured that all the applications are working seamlessly. Anyway, here are my suggestions ... 1) Compile it from source, install it in say /opt. 2) If (1) is not an option, try to install it from backports. If the package is not available in backports already, request for it on their mailing list. Someone might package it for you. 3) Try to see if the problem goes away by installing a older version of gnucash. hth raju -- Kamaraju S Kusumanchi http://malayamaarutham.blogspot.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Debian's glacial movement--a rant
On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 01:06:00PM -0700, Freddy Freeloader wrote:
> Michael Biebl wrote:
> >Freddy Freeloader wrote:
> >
> >>I'm experiencing a bug in Gnucash that appeared a couple of days ago on
> >>my system that makes Gnucash completely unusable for me. I turned in a
> >>bug report on Friday, checked on it yesterday, and by today the bug had
> >>been blocked from being displayed. It could be found by searching
> >>Debian's bug tracker, but only if you know the bug id number. If you
> >>just search for bugs in Gnucash the bug does not appear to exist.
> >>
> >>The bug was closed, and blocked, because it's been fixed upstream in
> >>version 2.2.9 which was released by Gnucash in February of this year.
Could you discuss how you're experiencing a new bug ("appeared a couple
of days ago") if you're not using gnucach in a new way? I'm sure there
are bugs in every piece of software I use. There are a couple of which
I am aware (if I care to think on it) but I have work-arounds or I
wouldn't have accepted the software for use and would have chosen a
different solution. I've never run into the "appeared a couple of days
ago" situation where the problem was a new bug; the problem has always
been in a different system (or is upstream of the keyboard :))
Doug.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Debian's glacial movement--a rant
John Foster writes: > What I can tell you is that a rant about any package maintainers efforts > is not going to improve the situation. If you do not want to take charge > of the situation and do something about it, then you have no alternative > except wait until things catch up. One way he could do something about it, of course, is to pay a Debian Developer to either patch the current version or package the fixed one. -- John Hasler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Debian's glacial movement--a rant
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Michael Biebl wrote: > Do you think the bug report was not correctly handled by > the maintainer? Perhaps the GC user community needs to petition the maintainer to explain the importance of this particular bug and that it would be worth while at least attempting the patch this particular fix into the current version rather than waiting for 2.9 to migrate to stable. mrc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Debian's glacial movement--a rant
Freddy Freeloader wrote: > As Sid is "only" 9 months behind Gnucash's release schedule at this point > I guess the fact that all my business records for the last couple of > years are in Gnucash means I'll be able to start doing my business > accounting again sometime after the first of next year, at a minimum, if > I wait for Debian... Why are you using Unstable in a mission-critical application? -- John Hasler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Debian's glacial movement--a rant
On Mon,06.Apr.09, 13:32:35, Jeff Chimene wrote: > For this reason, I rarely rely on Debianized versions of packages > important to my personal productivity. For example, Firefox, Java, > OpenOffice, Eclipse, Google Web Toolkit, Thunderbird are all installed > from their respective sites. I consider it an important aspect of Debian > that I can install into /usr/local and not trash the distro. That > doesn't always work (certain Perl modules come to mind). It's always the same question, do you want a system that doesn't change for ~ 1.5 years or do you always want to have the latest version of the application you are using (with the inherent risks). In my opinion rarely the new version brings new features *so important* that one just has to get it. But OTOH I do run unstable ;) (definitely *not* a production machine) Regards, Andrei -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein) signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian's glacial movement--a rant
On Mon, 2009-04-06 at 13:06 -0700, Freddy Freeloader wrote: > Michael Biebl wrote: > > Freddy Freeloader wrote: > > > > Hi > > > > > >> I've never been pissed off at Debian before but I guess there is always > >> a first. > >> > > > > That's usually not a good way to start a discussion (admitted, you said > > it's a > > rant, but aI'll try to answer anyway). > > > > > >> I'm experiencing a bug in Gnucash that appeared a couple of days ago on > >> my system that makes Gnucash completely unusable for me. I turned in a > >> bug report on Friday, checked on it yesterday, and by today the bug had > >> been blocked from being displayed. It could be found by searching > >> Debian's bug tracker, but only if you know the bug id number. If you > >> just search for bugs in Gnucash the bug does not appear to exist. > >> > >> The bug was closed, and blocked, because it's been fixed upstream in > >> version 2.2.9 which was released by Gnucash in February of this year. > >> > > > > Older bugs that have been fixed are automatically archived, so no longer > > show up > > by default. The bts allows you though, to show both archived and unarchived > > bug > > reports. If you are using the web frontend, scroll down to the bottom. > > > > > >> Great. The bug has been fixed. Why it needed to be hidden from being > >> displayed is puzzler for me, but that's the way it is. > >> > >> Now the bad news. > >> > >> Since Gnucash in both Sid and Sqeeze is now at version 2.2.6 I only have > >> to wait until Debian works through versions 2.2.7 and 2.2.8 before > >> Gnucash in Debian finally becomes usable for me again in version > >> 2.2.9. As Sid is "only" 9 months behind Gnucash's release schedule at > >> this point I guess the fact that all my business records for the last > >> couple of years are in Gnucash means I'll be able to start doing my > >> business accounting again sometime after the first of next year, at a > >> minimum, if I wait for Debian > >> > >> > > > > so what is your point? Do you think the bug report was not correctly > > handled by > > the maintainer? > > > Not at all. I'm saying because of how far Debian is behind in versions > of Gnucash it's going to be unusable by me at least until next year if > Debian stays at its current time lag behind Gnucash releases. As I > have all my business records stored in Gnucash this is a major problem > for me. > > This isn't aimed at any one developer. It's just a commentary on how > Debian moves forward. And, that's not always a bad thing. In most > cases it's fine as it means stable is exactly that in all meanings of > the word, but in this instance this really bites me in a bad way. > About my only choices are to spend a couple of days rebuilding and > restoring my system with a Lenny install, or moving to a distro that has > the current version of Gnucash. > > Part of this is also Gnucash's responsibility because 2.2.9 is built > against glib >= 2.6. Not many distro's are using that version of glib, > so it doesn't seem to me to make a whole lot of sense if they want the > latest versions of their software to be used. That decision practically > guarantees that their a lot of their bug fixes won't be available for > the better part of a year to most Linux users. > > You can't even compile from source because of it unless you want to > start making what are risky changes for most users. I certainly > couldn't predict what upgrading glib to version 2.6 would do to my > system. > > I've been using Debian now for almost 6 years, with a lot of that time > spent running testing or unstable on my desktop, and this is the first > time I've run across a bug that makes a package I depend on for my > business unusable for approximately a year. I find that to be a big > problem. > > If you don't think that would be a problem worthy of a rant for you, > well, what can I say? You must be the worlds most patient man. > > > Could you please point us to the relevant bug number. > > > > Michael > > > > > > It would appear to me that you only have three options: 1. Roll your own and use the basic tarball to do so. keeping it outside of Debian. The issue with that is orphaned libs and apps with no way to manage them. 2. Roll your own with "checkinstall" a better choice in my opinion. It will eliminate the 'orphaning' mentioned above. I actually compiled and have running a full BRL-CAD suit using checkinstall on Debian,Lenny. 3. Switch to a more easy to manage situation of book keeping. I use MoneyDance, a commercial program that runs as a java app for handling all my banking and financial needs. I also use SQL-Ledger from Debian to do my real accounting and business management functions. These have been doing the job for me for several versions of Debian with little effect from any upgrades. I did have a problem with the gcj stuff 2 upgrades ago. Nothing since. I have run t
Re: Debian's glacial movement--a rant
On 12/23/-28158 12:59 PM, Freddy Freeloader wrote: I've never been pissed off at Debian before but I guess there is always a first. I'm experiencing a bug in Gnucash that appeared a couple of days ago on my system that makes Gnucash completely unusable for me. I turned in a bug report on Friday, checked on it yesterday, and by today the bug had been blocked from being displayed. It could be found by searching Debian's bug tracker, but only if you know the bug id number. If you just search for bugs in Gnucash the bug does not appear to exist. The bug was closed, and blocked, because it's been fixed upstream in version 2.2.9 which was released by Gnucash in February of this year. Great. The bug has been fixed. Why it needed to be hidden from being displayed is puzzler for me, but that's the way it is. Now the bad news. Since Gnucash in both Sid and Sqeeze is now at version 2.2.6 I only have to wait until Debian works through versions 2.2.7 and 2.2.8 before Gnucash in Debian finally becomes usable for me again in version 2.2.9. As Sid is "only" 9 months behind Gnucash's release schedule at this point I guess the fact that all my business records for the last couple of years are in Gnucash means I'll be able to start doing my business accounting again sometime after the first of next year, at a minimum, if I wait for Debian I have no idea about the requirements for GC, but that doesn't prevent me from expressing an opinion! For this reason, I rarely rely on Debianized versions of packages important to my personal productivity. For example, Firefox, Java, OpenOffice, Eclipse, Google Web Toolkit, Thunderbird are all installed from their respective sites. I consider it an important aspect of Debian that I can install into /usr/local and not trash the distro. That doesn't always work (certain Perl modules come to mind). How about installing it independently of Debian? However, from a quick scan of the site (gnucash.org), it looks like there's only a Windows binary. Is compiling from source a no-go? In certain cases, I've had to wait for a Debianized version. e.g. Task Juggler went to the lastest gcc before Debian. If GC is using a gcc version that's not in your current Debian sources list, there may be an issue. Oh - and flames from Debian fanbois? > dev/null -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Debian's glacial movement--a rant
Freddy Freeloader wrote: > Michael Biebl wrote: >> Freddy Freeloader wrote: >> >> Hi >> >> >>> I've never been pissed off at Debian before but I guess there is always >>> a first. >>> >> That's usually not a good way to start a discussion (admitted, you said it's >> a >> rant, but aI'll try to answer anyway). >> >> >>> I'm experiencing a bug in Gnucash that appeared a couple of days ago on >>> my system that makes Gnucash completely unusable for me. I turned in a >>> bug report on Friday, checked on it yesterday, and by today the bug had >>> been blocked from being displayed. It could be found by searching >>> Debian's bug tracker, but only if you know the bug id number. If you >>> just search for bugs in Gnucash the bug does not appear to exist. >>> >>> The bug was closed, and blocked, because it's been fixed upstream in >>> version 2.2.9 which was released by Gnucash in February of this year. >>> >> Older bugs that have been fixed are automatically archived, so no longer >> show up >> by default. The bts allows you though, to show both archived and unarchived >> bug >> reports. If you are using the web frontend, scroll down to the bottom. >> >> >>> Great. The bug has been fixed. Why it needed to be hidden from being >>> displayed is puzzler for me, but that's the way it is. >>> >>> Now the bad news. >>> >>> Since Gnucash in both Sid and Sqeeze is now at version 2.2.6 I only have >>> to wait until Debian works through versions 2.2.7 and 2.2.8 before >>> Gnucash in Debian finally becomes usable for me again in version >>> 2.2.9. As Sid is "only" 9 months behind Gnucash's release schedule at >>> this point I guess the fact that all my business records for the last >>> couple of years are in Gnucash means I'll be able to start doing my >>> business accounting again sometime after the first of next year, at a >>> minimum, if I wait for Debian >>> >>> >> so what is your point? Do you think the bug report was not correctly handled >> by >> the maintainer? >> > Not at all. I'm saying because of how far Debian is behind in versions > of Gnucash it's going to be unusable by me at least until next year if > Debian stays at its current time lag behind Gnucash releases. As I > have all my business records stored in Gnucash this is a major problem > for me. > > This isn't aimed at any one developer. It's just a commentary on how > Debian moves forward. And, that's not always a bad thing. In most > cases it's fine as it means stable is exactly that in all meanings of > the word, but in this instance this really bites me in a bad way. > About my only choices are to spend a couple of days rebuilding and > restoring my system with a Lenny install, or moving to a distro that has > the current version of Gnucash. > > Part of this is also Gnucash's responsibility because 2.2.9 is built > against glib >= 2.6. Not many distro's are using that version of glib, > so it doesn't seem to me to make a whole lot of sense if they want the > latest versions of their software to be used. That decision practically > guarantees that their a lot of their bug fixes won't be available for > the better part of a year to most Linux users. > > You can't even compile from source because of it unless you want to > start making what are risky changes for most users. I certainly > couldn't predict what upgrading glib to version 2.6 would do to my > system. > > I've been using Debian now for almost 6 years, with a lot of that time > spent running testing or unstable on my desktop, and this is the first > time I've run across a bug that makes a package I depend on for my > business unusable for approximately a year. I find that to be a big > problem. Who says, it will take a year. Honestly that sounds a lot like BS. A lot of libraries were freezed during the lenny release and there are a couple of library transitions (include libglib) currently ongoing. My guess is, that it will take one more week or two, until the gnome transitions have settled and after that there is a reasonable chance that you might expect a new version of gnucash. You also have to keep in mind, that for a business critical system, stable or testing is likely a better option. Michael -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Debian's glacial movement--a rant
Michael Biebl wrote: Freddy Freeloader wrote: Hi I've never been pissed off at Debian before but I guess there is always a first. That's usually not a good way to start a discussion (admitted, you said it's a rant, but aI'll try to answer anyway). I'm experiencing a bug in Gnucash that appeared a couple of days ago on my system that makes Gnucash completely unusable for me. I turned in a bug report on Friday, checked on it yesterday, and by today the bug had been blocked from being displayed. It could be found by searching Debian's bug tracker, but only if you know the bug id number. If you just search for bugs in Gnucash the bug does not appear to exist. The bug was closed, and blocked, because it's been fixed upstream in version 2.2.9 which was released by Gnucash in February of this year. Older bugs that have been fixed are automatically archived, so no longer show up by default. The bts allows you though, to show both archived and unarchived bug reports. If you are using the web frontend, scroll down to the bottom. Great. The bug has been fixed. Why it needed to be hidden from being displayed is puzzler for me, but that's the way it is. Now the bad news. Since Gnucash in both Sid and Sqeeze is now at version 2.2.6 I only have to wait until Debian works through versions 2.2.7 and 2.2.8 before Gnucash in Debian finally becomes usable for me again in version 2.2.9. As Sid is "only" 9 months behind Gnucash's release schedule at this point I guess the fact that all my business records for the last couple of years are in Gnucash means I'll be able to start doing my business accounting again sometime after the first of next year, at a minimum, if I wait for Debian so what is your point? Do you think the bug report was not correctly handled by the maintainer? Not at all. I'm saying because of how far Debian is behind in versions of Gnucash it's going to be unusable by me at least until next year if Debian stays at its current time lag behind Gnucash releases. As I have all my business records stored in Gnucash this is a major problem for me. This isn't aimed at any one developer. It's just a commentary on how Debian moves forward. And, that's not always a bad thing. In most cases it's fine as it means stable is exactly that in all meanings of the word, but in this instance this really bites me in a bad way. About my only choices are to spend a couple of days rebuilding and restoring my system with a Lenny install, or moving to a distro that has the current version of Gnucash. Part of this is also Gnucash's responsibility because 2.2.9 is built against glib >= 2.6. Not many distro's are using that version of glib, so it doesn't seem to me to make a whole lot of sense if they want the latest versions of their software to be used. That decision practically guarantees that their a lot of their bug fixes won't be available for the better part of a year to most Linux users. You can't even compile from source because of it unless you want to start making what are risky changes for most users. I certainly couldn't predict what upgrading glib to version 2.6 would do to my system. I've been using Debian now for almost 6 years, with a lot of that time spent running testing or unstable on my desktop, and this is the first time I've run across a bug that makes a package I depend on for my business unusable for approximately a year. I find that to be a big problem. If you don't think that would be a problem worthy of a rant for you, well, what can I say? You must be the worlds most patient man. Could you please point us to the relevant bug number. Michael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Debian's glacial movement--a rant
On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 10:23:00 -0700, Freddy Freeloader wrote: [...] > I'm experiencing a bug in Gnucash that appeared a couple of days ago on > my system that makes Gnucash completely unusable for me. I turned in a > bug report on Friday, checked on it yesterday, and by today the bug had > been blocked from being displayed. It could be found by searching > Debian's bug tracker, but only if you know the bug id number. If you > just search for bugs in Gnucash the bug does not appear to exist. How are can we make sense of your problem without the bug number? Is this supposed to be some kind of test to see if the bug can really not be found? OK, I will play: My guess is that you are talking about bug #522458 (which is listed in the "Forwarded bugs - Important bugs" section). Do I win anything? > The bug was closed, and blocked, because it's been fixed upstream in > version 2.2.9 which was released by Gnucash in February of this year. That is the normal procedure as far as I understand it. > Great. The bug has been fixed. Why it needed to be hidden from being > displayed is puzzler for me, but that's the way it is. Or maybe it isn't. > Now the bad news. > > Since Gnucash in both Sid and Sqeeze is now at version 2.2.6 I only have > to wait until Debian works through versions 2.2.7 and 2.2.8 before > Gnucash in Debian finally becomes usable for me again in version 2.2.9. I think the maintainer will skip the intermittent versions and move right to 2.2.9 as soon as possible. However, he might have to wait until all of gnucash's dependencies are at sufficiently new versions for the new package to be built. > As Sid is "only" 9 months behind Gnucash's release schedule at this point > I guess the fact that all my business records for the last couple of > years are in Gnucash means I'll be able to start doing my business > accounting again sometime after the first of next year, at a minimum, if > I wait for Debian You cannot rely on unstable working all the time. It works very well for most of its packages most of the time, but there are no guarantees. Furthermore, you have to be able to accommodate the fact that it gets outdated during a release freeze. You can try to build the new version yourself, you can build 2.2.6 from source and apply the upstream patch, you can install another distribution with 2.2.9 in a chroot or virtual machine for the time being, etc. -- Regards,| http://users.icfo.es/Florian.Kulzer Florian | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Debian's glacial movement--a rant
On Mon, 2009-04-06 at 10:23 -0700, Freddy Freeloader wrote: > I've never been pissed off at Debian before but I guess there is always > a first. > > I'm experiencing a bug in Gnucash that appeared a couple of days ago on > my system that makes Gnucash completely unusable for me. I turned in a > bug report on Friday, checked on it yesterday, and by today the bug had > been blocked from being displayed. It could be found by searching > Debian's bug tracker, but only if you know the bug id number. If you > just search for bugs in Gnucash the bug does not appear to exist. > > The bug was closed, and blocked, because it's been fixed upstream in > version 2.2.9 which was released by Gnucash in February of this year. I think he's talking about #522458, which is neither closed nor hidden, but can be found on bugs.debian.org/gnucash under the heading "Forwarded bugs -- Important bugs". > [snip] -- -Julian Blake Kongslie vim: set ft=text : signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Debian's glacial movement--a rant
Freddy Freeloader wrote: Hi > I've never been pissed off at Debian before but I guess there is always > a first. That's usually not a good way to start a discussion (admitted, you said it's a rant, but aI'll try to answer anyway). > I'm experiencing a bug in Gnucash that appeared a couple of days ago on > my system that makes Gnucash completely unusable for me. I turned in a > bug report on Friday, checked on it yesterday, and by today the bug had > been blocked from being displayed. It could be found by searching > Debian's bug tracker, but only if you know the bug id number. If you > just search for bugs in Gnucash the bug does not appear to exist. > > The bug was closed, and blocked, because it's been fixed upstream in > version 2.2.9 which was released by Gnucash in February of this year. Older bugs that have been fixed are automatically archived, so no longer show up by default. The bts allows you though, to show both archived and unarchived bug reports. If you are using the web frontend, scroll down to the bottom. > Great. The bug has been fixed. Why it needed to be hidden from being > displayed is puzzler for me, but that's the way it is. > > Now the bad news. > > Since Gnucash in both Sid and Sqeeze is now at version 2.2.6 I only have > to wait until Debian works through versions 2.2.7 and 2.2.8 before > Gnucash in Debian finally becomes usable for me again in version > 2.2.9. As Sid is "only" 9 months behind Gnucash's release schedule at > this point I guess the fact that all my business records for the last > couple of years are in Gnucash means I'll be able to start doing my > business accounting again sometime after the first of next year, at a > minimum, if I wait for Debian > so what is your point? Do you think the bug report was not correctly handled by the maintainer? Could you please point us to the relevant bug number. Michael -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
