GC website - problems
Hi, It looks like there is a permissions screwed up on gnucash.org at the moment. Whenever I go to the website (main page or others...) I get: Not Found The requested URL / was not found on this server. Apache/1.3.31 Server at www.gnucash.org Port 80 This is reminiscent of when I set the perms wrong on my webpage. :-) Is this an indication of the/an update website coming online? Cheers, S. pgpUnnJHq7cl3.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: Mailing List Options [was Re: Switching...]
G'day Josh, * Josh Sled <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [051030 18:21]: > > X -changes should go to -devel. > > * Any commited change might generate discussion. > > * Again, hard to know before; hard to move after. > > * Again, anyone on -devel should be willing to see commits. > > I can imagine a large class of -devel subscribers that would be put off > by being forced into receiving every commit and its diff. Certainly I strongly concur with this. I guess that there are a number of us lurking on the -devel list either just out of interest or waiting to see if we can assist at some level that matches our coding/time constraints. I suspect that a lot of us will just unsubscribe and then what little developer base there exists will really shrink. Few, if any testers are going to want to read the diffs. I know (currently) I don't. Cheers, S. pgpNKuV5JfsQC.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
FW: Re: Doxygen performance issues
- Forwarded message from Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - > > My FC3 box is running v1.4.4 currently. I notice that the latest > > release is 1.4.5 > > Correct. That's what I'm using on Debian unstable. There are number of new > options from 1.4.4 to 1.4.5. So is there a consensus in the devs WRT what version of doxygen we are aiming for? > You haven't tried to build "cd src/doc/ && make doc" yet? Yup, didn't take too long and didn't crash my machine. You must have a REALLY underpowered setup! ;-) I have "time"ed a "make doc" and from a clean autogen.sh run on my directory, I get the following... real1m53.387s user1m31.535s sys 0m5.951s I'm really surprised you are having problems with doxygen, I honestly don't see anything that is vaguely necessitating any changes. By that I mean "make doc" is relatively fast and there are no obvious errors. Are you sure you haven't done something to cause your doxygen to play up? > Patch for src/doc/doxygen.cfg.in is attached. I'll apply it when it becomes clear to me what version of doxygen we/you/the collective will of the devs are talking about. Cheers, S. pgpBqggpsnzrP.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: Doxygen performance issues
G'day Neil, * Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [051028 16:34]: > 1. Our doxygen.cfg.in is out of date compared to Doxygen itself. Running: > $ doxygen -u doxygen.cfg.in > updates the config file to your currently installed Doxygen version. I really think this relates to the question that was doing the rounds recently (I can't remember the answer) relating to the base release version. Has it been updated to FC 2/3/4 or will the G2 branch remain at RH7.3 ? ;-) We need to ensure that the doxygen version is at most the default version for the base release of the G2 port. My FC3 box is running v1.4.4 currently. I notice that the latest release is 1.4.5, but I'm not sure if/when that will be released for FC3... > I'd hope that doxygen would not update the config in such a way as to make it > incompatible with earlier versions but I'm cautious about testing any changes > on FC3. Would someone with FC3 be willing to do a before and after > time-comparison if I send them a doxygen.cfg.in patch? (And let me know if > any config options produce errors like "Unknown option in config")? I'd be willing to help out with this. (Assuming my FC3 box doesn't die like yours does!) Cheers, S. pgpnYc3FN08XG.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: Gnucash.org SF link...
* Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [051028 15:26]: > > I've just decided to upgrade to the 1.8.12 release and the SourceForge > > link on the gnucash.org front page seems to be broken. > > It's old - it should reference the prdownloads subdomain. OK. Glad to know it's not necessarily me. For reference I've added it to the Bugzilla: Bug # 320125. Cheers, S. pgp8xyl0v5fsk.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Gnucash.org SF link...
Hi, I've just decided to upgrade to the 1.8.12 release and the SourceForge link on the gnucash.org front page seems to be broken. I'm not sure if it is a SourceForge issue or a typo on the main page. The front page links to: http://download.sourceforge.net/gnucash/ when SourceForge seems to prefer http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/gnucash === As I said, I'm not sure if this is a SF issue at the moment, or not. Cheers, S. pgpaBJOujHXSe.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: [Gnucash-changes] Eliminate a double free of memory.
> Speaking of which... Using g2 cvs from yesterday, I clicked on the titlebar > close button and the window closed but the app didn't exit So I think > we're still missing some events. There's a similar problem in one of the > business dialogs (the one that pops up when there are outstanding bills to be > paid) -- it doesn't close properly. Oh, the irony of being able to do this to you Derek... Bug #301856 :-) Cheers, S. pgpqgTtVAhkHH.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: Release of GnuCash stable version 1.8.11
G'day Chris, * Chris Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050206 20:27]: > The GnuCash development team proudly announces a new stable release of > the GnuCash Open Source Accounting Software. 1.8.11 compiles well on FC2, which I guess is no surprise. Problems / Questions: - I still have the same problem as with 1.8.10 when making a RPM - there is a reference in the .spec file to a rpm package redhat-release. This is easy enough to fix, but begs the question - why? This might be a bigger question than GnuCash, but here goes... Why still refer to redhat-release rather than fedora-release? Do you (the developers) want to make it easy to compile on RHEL or do you consider that there are more RedHat legacy users than a Fedora base? Is this something that Fedora/RedHat should get together and solve with a linux-release package (then SuSE, Gentoo and the rest could also get involved) listing the desired info? Is this resolved in FC3? Saying that, if anyone wants the 1.8.11 FC2 (S)RPM, or the slightly modified .spec file (for rolling your own), let me know. Cheers, S. signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: Release of GnuCash stable version 1.8.10
G'day Chris,
* Chris Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [041212 21:41]:
> What's New in GnuCash 1.8.10?
Creating an RPM on a fedora (FC2) system fails.
There is a line in rpm/gnucash.spec that reads:
%define rh_rel %(rpm -q --queryformat='%{VERSION}' redhat-release)
however this is a RedHat specific command. The equivalent for FC2
seems(!) to be
%define rh_rel %(rpm -q --queryformat='%{VERSION}' fedora-release)
Saying that, I've modified the spec file and now have a FC2 rpm if
anyone out there wants a copy.
Cheers,
S.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
gnucash-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: Progress toward Budget module
G'day Darin, * Darin Willits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [040803 16:09]: > > > > Can anyone else read it? > > > > Indeed, the attachments appear empty... > > Oops sorry. Something must have mucked up. I will re-send this patch > tonight when I get home. Sorry for the confusion. Have I missed your post or did it get sent off list? I'm interested in having a look at what you've done. Cheers, S. signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ gnucash-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: GNOME 2: MDI or SDI?
G'day Christian, I'm dipping my oar in without even looking at the Gnome2 source, but... * Christian Neumair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [040607 09:55]: > We've not yet made a decision whether we ought to use MDI or SDI for the > GNOME 2 port, which is a fundamental decision. In my opinion, we should > in no way mix them, because that heavily confuses users. We need to open What is the actual difficulty in mixing them?[*] Mozilla (for example) has both "New Window" and "New Tab". You will have (as is already being displayed in this thread) a division between the TAB/WINDOW crowds at your suggestion. [*] Is this not _conceptually_ as easy as having a function to 'OpenUI' and then choose (S/M)DI based on the users preference? I guess that there are technical differences, but is there not a way to abstract the details of the UI away from the actual GC code? I guess the finer details of the argument would not be appropriate here, but giving us a motivation for one choice over another might help the understanding. Just my $0.02 worth. Cheers, S. signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ gnucash-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
