gnucash/kmymoney

[Michael Havens]

thank you for giving me (and everyone who pays any attention) a bit of your 
wisdom. I thought the only reason my original machine broke was because I 
updated after they had released the new KDE. At the time one of the people 
trying to help me had said this was the case.

I would love to reinstall the repositories from the fresh install but those 
repositories lead to nothing. I tried to install things from those 
repositories and it could find nothing. I'll post a message on the discussion 
board and see if someone can post something I can use. 

Joseph, I really appreciate your help and I'll keep you posted on my progress 
in this regard.

On Friday 02 March 2007 8:41 pm, Joseph Sinclair wrote:
> Mike,
>   From the apt-get output you posted, it's pretty clear your repositories
> are for a different version of the system than you're running (hence the
> 780 packages not upgraded). The best solution from here is to simply
> re-install with the version you want to be running and DON'T change the
> repositories after that. Apt-get does a GREAT job of keeping your system in
> sync with a single version.  On many distro's, however, it won't do the
> upgrade properly (Ubuntu's latest update is infamous in this regard, and
> Feisty is likely to be just as bad; don't upgrade Ubuntu for new versions,
> except LTS->LTS, reinstall instead). For your stable system, you need to
> choose the long-term-support version for whatever distro you're running
> (look for a 3-5 year support commitment, examples include Ubuntu LTS, RHEL,
> etc...) and STICK TO IT.  Don't mess around with a stable system any more
> than you have to, and don't upgrade to a new release without testing it
> elsewhere first.  I've taken to doing upgrades on my stable system ONLY
> after I've tested the upgrade on another machine (which is why I didn't do
> the Edgy update on all my Ubuntu machines, it broke the test system badly
> enough to require a re-install so my Edgy machines are all fresh installs)
> and determined it's both safe to upgrade and enhances system stability or
> adds critical features. I have multiple Linux systems, one that runs a LTS
> version of Linux that I leave alone except for critical updates; it's
> stable and I use it for day-to-day tasks.  The other systems are available
> for experimentation because I DON'T EVER keep important data on them, and
> if they're down for a few weeks it doesn't hurt me.  One of the "testing"
> machines is usually the guinea pig for any changes to the stable machine. 
> I install the test machine to match stable, then I do to the test what I
> want to do on stable, and I only repeat the change on stable if test works
> fine for several days after the change (if I need something NOW I do have a
> semi-stable system, but that gets into some of the second-order
> complexities of my home net and is beyond the scope of this discussion).
>
> <Rant disclaimer="The following is a generalization, and is NOT related to
> any particular person"> One of the biggest mistakes I see people make,
> IMNSHO, with Linux is experimenting/exploring with their day-to-day
> critical system that has their important data and applications (I even did
> this when I first started using Linux).  When they're playing around makes
> the system unstable, they complain about Linux.  The thing is that Linux
> isn't at fault, it allows you to do weird stuff because sometimes you might
> want to, but you're expected to either know what you're doing before you
> start, or do your learning on a spare machine you can afford to rebuild
> from scratch every now and then without getting upset. Some people think
> Windows is better for less-technical users because you don't have to
> constantly "tweak it" to keep it up and running.  This is complete bunk. 
> Windows needs far more support to keep running properly than Linux ever
> has, the difference is that Linux *allows* you to tweak it constantly, so a
> lot of people who should just leave it alone try to make a perfectly
> functional system run "better" and end up breaking it.  There's nothing
> wrong with trying things to make a system better, just don't do it with
> your critical day-to-day machine. Again, set up one machine that's for real
> work, and LEAVE IT ALONE except for critical updates (hopefully applied by
> the distribution's auto-update mechanism in the background every week or
> so).  Do your tweaking and learning on a separate "learning" system (this
> can be in a Virtual Machine if your main system is fairly powerful) and
> expect to rebuild it from scratch every few weeks when you break stuff.
> </Rant>
>
> Michael Havens wrote:
> > This gets me to thinking: perhaps i could apt-get the stable version.
> > THAT MIght work. To be completely honest with you I tried it already and
> > it responded:
> >
> > bmike1 at 1[~]$ sudo apt-get install gnucash=1.8.10-12
> > Reading package lists... Done
> > Building dependency tree... Done
> > E: Version '1.8.10-12' for 'gnucash' was not found
> > bmike1 at 1[~]$ sudo apt-get install gnucash=stable
> > Reading package lists... Done
> > Building dependency tree... Done
> > E: Version 'stable' for 'gnucash' was not found
> > bmike1 at 1[~]$ sudo apt-get install gnucash=testing
> > Reading package lists... Done
> > Building dependency tree... Done
> > E: Version 'testing' for 'gnucash' was not found
> > bmike1 at 1[~]$
> >
> > What did I do wrong? Am I supposed to set something to stable? What?
> >
> > On Friday 02 March 2007 6:53 pm, Michael Havens wrote:
> >> That is what caused this whole problem. I upgraded my ssystem and broke
> >> EVERYthing.
> >>
> >> On Friday 02 March 2007 6:48 pm, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> >>> That's part (or most) of your problem. You should do the updates. The
> >>> farther you get behind, the harder is will be for you to update your
> >>> system. If you do updates frequently (like every week or at least every
> >>> month), it will make it easier for you to keep up.
> >>>
> >>>> 77 upgraded, 48 newly installed, 18 to remove and 780 not upgraded.
> >>>> Need to get 170MB of archives.
> >>>> After unpacking 41.7MB of additional disk space will be used.
> >>>> Do you want to continue [Y/n]? n
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss at lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change  you mail settings:
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss