download transactions?

[Andre Powell]

Hopefully an experimental will be available for 10.3.9 I can always wait for a stable, as of right now the only thing that I really would like is budget capabilities - easily fixed with an OO spreadsheet/database who knows. Or I can always get adventurous and compile it myself. (BTW The Little budget tool  has anyone got around the Qt_UIC issue during a configure on a Mac.)
  There seems to be an issue in downloading the binary (LibOFX) and getting everything setup right with GnuCash (and fink) so I looked through my notes --- and I used the source which works better.
   
  

David Reiser <dbreiser at earthlink.net> wrote:
  
On Aug 25, 2006, at 9:15 PM, Andre Powell wrote:

> A couple of questions:
> 1. Is there an eta on LibOFX 0.8.2 and GnuCash 2.0.1
> to fink (especially for 10.3.9 waiting to get Leopard
> with my new Mac next year) - I tried using a later
> version of LibOFX 0.7.0-2 and could not import anymore
> 2. [snipped]

I don't know about 10.3. The 10.4 unstable version should be up 
within days. At the moment (since libofx 0.8.2 was only release about 
12 hours ago) the fink experimental version of GnuCash 2.0.1 uses 
libofx 0.8.0, aqbanking 2.2.0, and gwenhywfar 2.3.1. It worked for me 
last weekend. There were a few details to iron out with the packaging 
file, but it's almost done.

I was surprised that the experimental version even worked for me with 
OFXDirectConnect. All my out-of-fink-tree compiled stuff is in /opt, 
and /opt is nowhere in my path, so I was working under the assumption 
that I wouldn't interfere with the fink-only install. I suppose the 
gnucash conf files might point to the newer version of libofx in / 
opt???? Anyway, I don't see any reason why libofx 0.8.2 won't show up 
very soon in fink.

As for 10.3 vs. 10.4, there are a lot of packages that show up in the 
same version for 10.3 as 10.4, but I know zero about the limitations 
of that seeming compatibility.

With respect to libofx 0.7.0-2 vs 0.7.0-1, did you recompile gnucash 
after the libofx upgrade? They moved some things around in libofx1 vs 
libofx1-shlibs, so that may have screwed up something with importing. 
(My understanding is that that particular type of failure isn't 
supposed to happen -- such effects are supposed to cause a name 
change, or something. But my understanding is limited...)

Dave
--
David Reiser
dbreiser at earthlink.net



 		
---------------------------------
Stay in the know. Pulse on the new Yahoo.com.  Check it out.