My bête noire.....Gimp

The place to post if you need help or advice

Moderators: ChrisThornett, LXF moderators

My bête noire.....Gimp

Postby catgate » Sun Jun 24, 2012 5:16 pm

I feel there must be some logical reason for the following, but it continues to elude me.

I am still running Ubuntu 10.04 on my main machine. The version of Gimp I am running is 2.7.2 according to the "About" screen. However on Synaptic Package Manager it is shown as 2.7.3.

I have just done a remove and a reinstall to no avail. Do I have to shake a six before I can PASS GO?
Oh, sod it.
catgate
LXF regular
 
Posts: 1037
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 6:45 pm
Location: Just over there, in that corner.

Postby MartyBartfast » Sun Jun 24, 2012 5:42 pm

Dunno about Ubuntu, but on my fedora box gimp points to /usr/bin/gimp, which is itself a symlink to /usr/bin/gimp-2.8. So in your case it could be that you've got 2.7.2 dangling around from a previous installation and gimp is symlinked to it, even though you've installed 2.7.3 via synaptic.


So I would drop to a console and do:

$ which gimp

then do an ls -ld of the folder where that's pointing and see whether there are multiple versions there, and whether gimp is symlinked to the wrong one.
If that is the case it's probably just a case of repointing the symlink and then deleting the old image.
I have been touched by his noodly appendage.
User avatar
MartyBartfast
LXF regular
 
Posts: 814
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 7:25 am
Location: Hants, UK

Postby nelz » Sun Jun 24, 2012 7:07 pm

Didn't this come up a few weeks ago? It appears to be a packaging glitch.
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." (Albert Einstein)
User avatar
nelz
Site admin
 
Posts: 8468
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 11:52 am
Location: Warrington, UK

Postby catgate » Sun Jun 24, 2012 9:29 pm

MartyBartfast wrote:
So I would drop to a console and do:
$ which gimp



I get
/usr/bin/gimp
and therein resides a link to 2.7.2 ( which is what comes up when click the Gimp icon)

When I go on to the Synaptic Package Manager the installed Gimp is shown as 2.7.3. Before I did the remove/reinstall mentioned above it SPM was showning 2.7.2.

[quiote= "nelz"] :-
Didn't this come up a few weeks ago? It appears to be a packaging glitch.
[/quote]
I think you might be right, I'm not sure. I have been playing around with a very sad Gimp for some time now. I think it might have been upset by an update some months ago.
Oh, sod it.
catgate
LXF regular
 
Posts: 1037
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 6:45 pm
Location: Just over there, in that corner.

Re: My bête noire.....Gimp

Postby Ram » Sun Jun 24, 2012 10:59 pm

catgate wrote:I feel there must be some logical reason for the following, but it continues to elude me.

I am still running Ubuntu 10.04 on my main machine. The version of Gimp I am running is 2.7.2 according to the "About" screen. However on Synaptic Package Manager it is shown as 2.7.3.

I have just done a remove and a reinstall to no avail. Do I have to shake a six before I can PASS GO?


So am I and my gimp is listed as 2.6.8 both in Synaptic and the link in /usr/bin and from the About box within gimp.

lubuntu LXDE 13.10 running on AMD Phenom II*4; ASUS Crosshair III Formula MB; 4 GB Ram.....
User avatar
Ram
LXF regular
 
Posts: 1674
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 9:44 pm
Location: Guisborough

Re: My bête noire.....Gimp

Postby catgate » Mon Jun 25, 2012 11:25 am

Ram wrote:
So am I and my gimp is listed as 2.6.8 both in Synaptic and the link in /usr/bin and from the About box within gimp.


Before I retired I was Q.A. and Tech. Serv. Manager for a very well known Mulinational. It was a "modern, forward looking company" i.e. it spent enormous time and money (and effort) on "Cost Reduction" and so our Monthly Cost Saving meetings often became a battle ground.
We had a rather weird Industrial Engineering Manager, who had somehow conned his way into the company and had somehow remained, despite his perpetual display of incompetence.
At one of our monthly jamborees he presented one of his "new schemes" (most of them fed to him by his staff, who were smarter than him and who were constantly pulling the wool over his eyes).
I have forgotten what it was all about but it was one of the many times when I was obliged to say, " Sorry, Tony, but I am afraid this is just not acceptable. You are degrading the product and I shall just have to veto the scheme."
His response on this occasion was classic, and I feel it must be applicable to Gimp too.
He said, " Well you must realise that all improvements are not necessarily for the better." !!!!!!!!!!
Oh, sod it.
catgate
LXF regular
 
Posts: 1037
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 6:45 pm
Location: Just over there, in that corner.

Re: My bête noire.....Gimp

Postby Ram » Mon Jun 25, 2012 12:37 pm

catgate wrote:
Ram wrote:
So am I and my gimp is listed as 2.6.8 both in Synaptic and the link in /usr/bin and from the About box within gimp.



He said, " Well you must realise that all improvements are not necessarily for the better." !!!!!!!!!!


I couldn't agree more - current bug bear for me is Adobe and Firefox on Windows. Install latest Adobe update and it breaks video play back in Firefox.


In your case I'd assume you have some backport or other none standard repository where gimp as been updated from.

lubuntu LXDE 13.10 running on AMD Phenom II*4; ASUS Crosshair III Formula MB; 4 GB Ram.....
User avatar
Ram
LXF regular
 
Posts: 1674
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 9:44 pm
Location: Guisborough

Re: My bête noire.....Gimp

Postby catgate » Mon Jun 25, 2012 1:38 pm

Ram wrote:
I couldn't agree more - current bug bear for me is Adobe and Firefox on Windows. Install latest Adobe update and it breaks video play back in Firefox.


In your case I'd assume you have some backport or other none standard repository where gimp as been updated from.


Well, as I keep saying, I'm a Luddite at heart, and instinctively "dislike" any radical change. For me, even "Windows" was just such a thing, just when we had all got used to DOS and mastered Basic. So I try to fiddle about as little as possible and only use S.P.M. and automatic updates (unless the situation is extremely dire). Even the word "backport" has unseemly connotations for we Luddites!!!
Oh, sod it.
catgate
LXF regular
 
Posts: 1037
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 6:45 pm
Location: Just over there, in that corner.

Postby nelz » Mon Jun 25, 2012 1:48 pm

The 2.7 series were public betas, so I'm not sure running one of those appeals to your sensibilities as betas change frequently. 2.8 is the stable release.
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." (Albert Einstein)
User avatar
nelz
Site admin
 
Posts: 8468
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 11:52 am
Location: Warrington, UK

Postby catgate » Mon Jun 25, 2012 2:03 pm

nelz wrote:The 2.7 series were public betas, so I'm not sure running one of those appeals to your sensibilities as betas change frequently. 2.8 is the stable release.

Yes, the "About screen" image (with a mining/pot holing/painting cat) says "This is an unstable development release". Which makes me wonder how, due to my "sensibilities, it found its way in to my system....unless Ubuntu release "unstable developments" as updates or list them in SPM.
Oh, sod it.
catgate
LXF regular
 
Posts: 1037
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 6:45 pm
Location: Just over there, in that corner.

Postby nelz » Tue Jun 26, 2012 1:07 am

They do, Ubuntu routinely use bleeding edge versions, it is based on Debian Testing. If you want tried and tested versions with minimal changes, go for Debian Stable.
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." (Albert Einstein)
User avatar
nelz
Site admin
 
Posts: 8468
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 11:52 am
Location: Warrington, UK

Postby catgate » Tue Jun 26, 2012 9:11 am

nelz wrote:They do, Ubuntu routinely use bleeding edge versions, it is based on Debian Testing. If you want tried and tested versions with minimal changes, go for Debian Stable.

Well I'll be %^& *()%%)" &^ $%^& ed!!!!!! :roll:

So how does this square up with L.T.S. ?
Last edited by catgate on Tue Jun 26, 2012 9:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
Oh, sod it.
catgate
LXF regular
 
Posts: 1037
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 6:45 pm
Location: Just over there, in that corner.

Postby towy71 » Tue Jun 26, 2012 9:27 am

catgate wrote:Well I'll be %^& *()%%)" &^ $%^& ed!!!!!! :roll:
Well yes you are :P , there has often been moans about Ubuntu breaking because it uses bleeding edge stuff. Indeed that is why I generally wait a month or two before I upgrade, cos they will have fixed things by then :wink: :roll:
still looking for that door into summer
User avatar
towy71
Moderator
 
Posts: 4262
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 2:11 pm
Location: wild West Wales

Postby Ram » Wed Jun 27, 2012 3:12 pm

Just checked my Laptop and it is also running 2.6.8 on Ubuntu 10.04 lts.

lubuntu LXDE 13.10 running on AMD Phenom II*4; ASUS Crosshair III Formula MB; 4 GB Ram.....
User avatar
Ram
LXF regular
 
Posts: 1674
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 9:44 pm
Location: Guisborough

Postby catgate » Sat Jul 21, 2012 8:31 pm

Over the last week or two I have had several attempts to download Gimp 2.6.xx onto my Ubuntu 10.04 system after "complete removal", by SPM, of my existing abomination rejoicing under the appelation of "Gimp 2.7.2".

Each time, after using various repositories, I always finish up with 2.7.2 back again, despite the fact that to all intents and purposes the item I am supposedly downloading is 2.6.xx.

Surely there must be a way of fishing out of the archives a version of 2.6.xx and popping it onto my machine? Or am I relying on my rose tinted spectacles too much?
Oh, sod it.
catgate
LXF regular
 
Posts: 1037
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 6:45 pm
Location: Just over there, in that corner.

Next

Return to Help!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron