Backport or not ?
janssens-geert at telenet.be
Fri Jun 22 12:43:34 EDT 2012
On 22-06-12 18:11, Mike Alexander wrote:
> On Jun 22, 2012, at 4:41 AM, Geert Janssens wrote:
>> I wasn't very awake apparently yesterday when I wrote my first message. David's mail triggered me to actually *test* how 2.4.10 would react on the new data format:
>> - It opens the file without any warning
>> - The scheduled transaction is missing the parameter (weekly adjust)
>> - But if you don't change the scheduled transaction, the parameter won't get lost either: reopening the file again in trunk shows the parameter is still saved.
>> - Back to 2.4.10: when exiting the application, it spews a few assertion failures in g_hash_for_each:
>> CRIT<GLib> g_hash_table_foreach: assertion `version == hash_table->version' failed (3 times)
>> - Trying to modify or create a scheduled transaction in 2.4.10 with the new data fails with a vague error that the database transaction failed.
> Did you try this with an XML file or only a database? It seems to me that the XML backend might lose this field when the file is saved, even if the scheduled transaction isn't edited but I haven't tried this to be sure.
You are right. When opening a new datafile with 2.4.10 and then saving
it as xml, the field is lost. This is similar to opening an old format
xml datafile in 2.4.10, saving it as sql and saving it back as xml.
Because the same can happen in 2.4.10, I wouldn't consider this a
But I think writing a faq entry for it may be useful, depending on how
many people actually hit all of these conditions:
- working in sql in 2.4.11
- saving to xml in 2.4.10
- while having scheduled transactions with the "except on weekends"
field set to non-standard
Knowing Murphy, obviously there will be someone entering that
combination of conditions. :)
More information about the gnucash-devel