On 1/28/2016 6:49 PM, Francis Gerund wrote:
On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 7:13 PM, Doug Newgard <scim...@archlinux.info>
wrote:

On Thu, 28 Jan 2016 18:57:05 -0500
Francis Gerund <ranr...@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And I thought that even if it is flagged as out-of-date, it would still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 Even if a package is flagged out of date, it will still download and install successfully, unless there's a problem with it's gpg signature.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

Reply via email to