On 1/28/2016 6:49 PM, Francis Gerund wrote:
On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 7:13 PM, Doug Newgard <scimmia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jan 2016 18:57:05 -0500
Francis Gerund <ranrund@xxxxxxxxx> 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And I thought that even if it is flagged as out-of-date, it would still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 Even if a package is flagged out of date,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
