How do you enter a scheduled transaction?

[Russell Gadd]

Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 12:12:04PM +0000, Russell Gadd wrote:
>   
>> Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
>>     
>>> On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 07:40:15PM +0000, Russell Gadd wrote:
>>>   
>>>       
>>>> Josh Sled wrote:
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>>>> "Scott Simpson" <simpson100 at gmail.com> writes:
>>>>>   
>>>>>       
>>>>>           
>>>>>> GnuCash 2.2.0
>>>>>>     
>>>>>>         
>>>>>>             
>>>>> What distro/OS?  2.2.4 is the latest, and has some good bug fixes.  I'm not
>>>>> sure what distros are even shipping 2.2.0 at this point.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>   
>>>>>       
>>>>>           
>>>> Josh, are there significant bugs with scheduled transactions I should 
>>>> look at ? I'm using 2.0.5 in Debian Etch and am about to set some up. I 
>>>> noticed that v 2.2 introduced a new file format for these which isn't 
>>>> backwards compatible. This doesn't worry me, but it would be a concern 
>>>> if 2.0.5 had to be fixed in this area in any significant way.
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> It's amazing how fast stable gets behind, and then how far back it
>>> gets. I think you are well advised to try and upgrade to the 2.2
>>> series. I checked backports, and it's not there. :(. I also don't
>>> honestly know the state of trying to build the 2.2 series in etch, but
>>> I suspect it's not that bad. I encourage you to look into it at least.
>>>
>>> How that affects SX, I don't know.
>>>
>>> A
>>>   
>>>       
>> Thanks Andrew. I downloaded and built 2.2.4 this morning. This was my 
>> first build from source of anything, so I am very pleased it suceeded.
>>
>> The build instructions on Gnucash's web site for Debian systems appear 
>> to assume you can build as part of Debian's packaging system but this 
>> failed when I tried. The instructions assume you can download it from 
>> Debian's repositories with apt-get. I aborted that and downloaded from 
>> sourceforge and built it with the instructions in the docs, which worked 
>> fine. I also purged Debian's own 2.0.5 package just for good measure.
>>     
>
> yeah, those instructions are targeted specifically at rebuilding the
> current debian package with some different features enabled. 
>
> to follow that path with 2.2.4, you'd have to pull down the source
> from debian (2.0.5) *and* the source from gnucash directly. Then you'd need to
> copy over the debian specific build stuff (in debian/) to the 2.2.4
> tree. THen you could remove the debian (2.0.5) source and proceed
> following the same instructions using dpkg etc. However, it's likely
> you'd have to mess with the debian/rules file and other bits to get it
> to work. 
>
> otherwise, its a pretty simple `apt-get build-dep gnucash` and a wget
> from gnucash and the typical ./configure && make && make install with
> the options of your choice. 
>   
Yes this is the procedure I used. I presume the build-dep would have 
used the dependencies of the 2.0.5 version, but these were unchanged for 
2.2.4? As a newcomer to compiling from source I didn't know whether to 
use sudo or to run as root - does it make a difference? I actually used 
sudo where without it failed, but it would have been easier to run as 
root. However I wasn't sure whether this would then not be able to allow 
a normal user to use the package. I noticed that the Debian instructions 
used something called "fakeroot" which I gather allows the root account 
to be used where necessary. Is there some useful description somewhere I 
can read which explains this stuff?
> You might consider rebuilding with
> --prefix=/some/other/place so that it doesn't conflict with debian's
> install. But that likely won't be an issue for you until you move up
> from etch.
>
>   
I purged Debian's Gnucash from the system. All is well at the moment. As 
and when I upgrade to the next Debian stable I may revert to the Debian 
version - depending on which one it is.
>> (The only thing I'm missing now is the Gnucash icon - can't find it in 
>> the stuff downloaded.)
>>     
>
> src/pixmaps/
>
>   
I deleted the source tree after building it (keeping the tar file) - 
should I reinstate this in case there is something else I may need when 
running the system or would the pixmaps directory be sufficient?
> A
>