Your message dated 10 Jan 2005 14:53:56 -0800
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line [EMAIL PROTECTED] Re: Bug#278324: better now, but why?
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 26 Oct 2004 06:45:16 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Oct 25 23:45:16 2004
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from c-24-13-160-50.client.comcast.net (bert) [24.13.160.50]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1CML52-0006kQ-00; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 23:45:16 -0700
Received: by bert (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id 9902A4EEF1; Tue, 26 Oct 2004 01:44:37 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Bob Horvath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: gnucash: "Gdk-ERROR **: BadValue (integer parameter out of range for
operation)" on startup
X-Mailer: reportbug 3.1
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 01:44:37 -0500
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
X-Spam-Level:
Package: gnucash
Version: 1.8.9-4
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
When trying to start gnucash, I get the following:
Gdk-ERROR **: BadValue (integer parameter out of range for operation)
serial 108 error_code 2 request_code 45 minor_code 0
It does not start making it unusable.
Bob
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.6-1-k7
Locale: LANG=en_US.ISO-8859-15, LC_CTYPE=en_US.ISO-8859-15 (charmap=ISO-8859-15)
Versions of packages gnucash depends on:
ii bonobo 1.0.22-2.2 The GNOME Bonobo System.
ii gdk-imlib1 1.9.14-16 imaging library for use with gtk (
ii gnucash-common 1.8.9-4 A personal finance tracking progra
ii guile-1.6-libs 1.6.4-4 Main Guile libraries
ii guile-1.6-slib 1.6.4-4 Guile SLIB support
ii libart2 1.4.2-19 The GNOME canvas widget - runtime
ii libaudiofile0 0.2.6-4 Open-source version of SGI's audio
ii libbonobo2 1.0.22-2.2 The GNOME Bonobo library.
ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-18 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
ii libdate-manip-perl 5.42a-2 a perl library for manipulating da
ii libdb3 3.2.9-20 Berkeley v3 Database Libraries [ru
ii libesd0 0.2.35-2 Enlightened Sound Daemon - Shared
ii libfinance-quote-perl 1.08-1 Perl module for retrieving stock q
ii libfreetype6 2.1.7-2.2 FreeType 2 font engine, shared lib
ii libgal23 0.24-1.3 G App Libs (run time library)
ii libgdk-pixbuf-gnome2 0.22.0-7 The GNOME1 Canvas pixbuf library
ii libgdk-pixbuf2 0.22.0-7 The GdkPixBuf image library, gtk+
ii libghttp1 1.0.9-15 original GNOME HTTP client library
ii libglade-gnome0 1:0.17-3 Library to load .glade files at ru
ii libglade0 1:0.17-3 Library to load .glade files at ru
ii libglib1.2 1.2.10-9 The GLib library of C routines
ii libgnome32 1.4.2-19 The GNOME libraries
ii libgnomeprint15 0.37-5 The GNOME Print architecture - run
ii libgnomesupport0 1.4.2-19 The GNOME libraries (Support libra
ii libgnomeui32 1.4.2-19 The GNOME libraries (User Interfac
ii libgtk1.2 1.2.10-17 The GIMP Toolkit set of widgets fo
ii libgtkhtml20 1.0.4-6.1 HTML rendering/editing library - r
ii libguile-ltdl-1 1.6.4-4 Guile's patched version of libtool
ii libguppi16 0.40.3-10 GNOME graph and plot component
ii libgwrapguile1 1.3.4-12 g-wrap: Tool for exporting C libra
ii libice6 4.3.0.dfsg.1-8 Inter-Client Exchange library
ii libltdl3 1.5.6-2 A system independent dlopen wrappe
ii liboaf0 0.6.10-3 The GNOME Object Activation Framew
ii libofx0c102 0.6.6-2.1 library to support Open Financial
ii liborbit0 0.5.17-9 Libraries for ORBit - a CORBA ORB
ii libpopt0 1.7-5 lib for parsing cmdline parameters
ii libqthreads-12 1.6.4-4 QuickThreads library for Guile
ii libsm6 4.3.0.dfsg.1-8 X Window System Session Management
ii libstdc++5 1:3.3.5-2 The GNU Standard C++ Library v3
ii libx11-6 4.3.0.dfsg.1-8 X Window System protocol client li
ii libxext6 4.3.0.dfsg.1-8 X Window System miscellaneous exte
ii libxi6 4.3.0.dfsg.1-8 X Window System Input extension li
ii libxml1 1:1.8.17-8 GNOME XML library
ii libzvt2 1.4.2-19 The GNOME zvt (zterm) widget
ii oaf 0.6.10-3 The GNOME Object Activation Framew
ii slib 3a1-4 Portable Scheme library
ii xlibs 4.3.0.dfsg.1-8 X Window System client libraries m
ii zlib1g 1:1.2.2-1 compression library - runtime
-- no debconf information
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 278324-close) by bugs.debian.org; 10 Jan 2005 22:53:58 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Jan 10 14:53:58 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from vp085189.reshsg.uci.edu (becket.becket.net) [128.195.85.189]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1Co8QA-0007gJ-00; Mon, 10 Jan 2005 14:53:58 -0800
Received: from tb by becket.becket.net with local (Exim 4.34)
id 1Co8Q9-0002no-2F
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 10 Jan 2005 14:53:57 -0800
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Re: Bug#278324: better now, but why?
X-Reply-Permission: Posted or emailed replies to this message constitute
permission for an emailed response.
X-PGP-Fingerprint: 1F0A1E51 63 28 EB DA E6 44 E5 5E EC F3 04 26 4E BF 1A 92
X-Zippy-Says: As a FAD follower, my BEVERAGE choices are rich and fulfilling!
From: Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 10 Jan 2005 14:53:56 -0800
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Lines: 62
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_01,HAS_BUG_NUMBER
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Level:
X-From-Line: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Oct 27 13:51:40 2004
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Envelope-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivery-date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 13:51:40 -0700
Received: from a.mx.zettai.net ([207.58.154.6])
by becket.becket.net with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CMulg-00086p-BQ
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 13:51:40 -0700
Received: (qmail 61913 invoked by uid 80); 27 Oct 2004 20:51:39 -0000
Received: from 136.182.2.221
(SquirrelMail authenticated user [EMAIL PROTECTED]);
by mail.zoper.com with HTTP; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 16:51:39 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 16:51:39 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Bug#278324: better now, but why?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "Thomas Bushnell BSG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.3a
X-Mailer: SquirrelMail/1.4.3a
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Importance: Normal
Lines: 32
Xref: becket.becket.net incoming.generic:327338
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Bob Horvath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> I did the changes listed at
>> http://egads.ertius.org/~rob/font_guide.txt (/msg apt at irc is
>> amazing!). I also installed xfstt which I did not have before. It
>> works great now. I realize font configurations are very confusing,
>> but I would have hoped for better dependencies.
>> I would be happy to help debug why I was having problems if anyone is
>> interested.
>
> Unfortunately, dependencies aren't the fix, because they would only
> make sure the fonts are installed on your own system, and the problems
> happen whenever the fonts aren't installed on the X server's system.
>
> Thomas
>
One of the things that makes me love Debian is the way the dependencies
usually prevent this kind of thing from happening. If there is a
dependency on x server fonts, it seems like there should be a way to mark
it such that the dependency would be met by some other means. I don't
know enough to know how, just that quite often Debain excells at this kind
of thing.
Anyway, I appreciate greatly your help on this, and your involvement in
the Debian effort.
If I need to do anything to close the bug report, let me know.
Bob
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
