On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 7:54 PM, kendell clark <coffeekingms@gmail.com> wrote:
On 1/28/2016 6:49 PM, Francis Gerund wrote:
On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 7:13 PM, Doug Newgard <scimmia@archlinux.info> wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jan 2016 18:57:05 -0500
Francis Gerund <ranrund@gmail.com> wrote:
Should this be reported as a bug (or 2-3 bugs)?
No, it's not a bug. Info about this has been all over the mailing lists, forums, and IRC for days. Do some checking around.
I'm sort of new to Arch. I just installed yesterday, so didn't know about that. I did not see a bug report (maybe I missed it).
And I thought that even if it is flagged as out-of-date, it would still install.
I thought it was a reasonable question to ask (with some detail provided), and I was tring to be helpful.
I don't know the etiquette here yet. Sorry.
And Gnucash is really important to me.
I will try checking the email archives.
At Arch, is IRC preferred over mailing lists as a source of information?
IRC is much harder for em to use effectively; it's like trying to dring from a fire hose.
This seems reasonable to me. Even if a package is flagged out of date, it will still download and install successfully, unless there's a problem with it's gpg signature. If that's the case, pacman will fail with a sometimes cryptic error. If you want, I can try building a package from current stable gnucash source and upload it somewhere where you can fetch until arch updates it's package. Thanks Kendell clark
Kendall, Thanks for your reply. After checking the mailing list archives, I found a similar problem was with the "courage" package, which was solved by (as root): pacman-key --refresh-keys I tried that, and it *seems* to have worked. I downloaded Gnucash 2.6.10-1, and it *appears* to be okay. So, don't go to the trouble of building a package. But thanks for offering. I appreciate it!