LWN.net Logo

Looking forward to GnuCash 2.4

By Jonathan Corbet
May 18, 2010
Long-time LWN readers will be aware that your editor has, for some time, been looking for a free accounting system which would handle the needs of a small business like, well, LWN. So it is with some interest that your editor has followed the progress of the GnuCash 2.3 development series. GnuCash is currently in the "string freeze" stage: development is seen as being close enough to done that no more changes to any visible text are allowed. So perhaps it's time to look at what the GnuCash developers have done this time around.

The actual list of new features is surprisingly short; much of the work in this development cycle has been aimed at internal improvements. Near the top of the list is the ability to use WebKit to render graphs along with GtkHTML. Your editor will confess that he has not tested out this feature; HTML rendering is a tiny part of what GnuCash does, so the availability of an alternative rendering engine is not particularly exciting.

The other headline feature is more interesting, though: the GnuCash developers have added a database backend which is capable of interfacing with Sqlite, MySQL, or PostgreSQL. The XML-based native file format is adequate for personal finance uses (though it is quite bulky), but it does not scale well to the numbers of transactions seen in a typical business setting, and it is not well suited to a multi-user, integrated workflow. GnuCash had a database backend in the 1.6 days, but it was never well supported and it did not work with the GnuCash business features. The database backend in 2.4 has been redone from the beginning, and it supports all of the program's capabilities.

Those wanting to use this feature need to be prepared for a bit of a rough start, though; the related documentation is, one might say, sparse. Actually, this documentation does not exist at all. What your editor figured out is this: users should create an empty database (default name is "gnucash") to hold the accounts. The relevant libdbi drivers must be installed on the system. Then, opening GnuCash and selecting "save to" will yield a dialog with a pulldown at the top; the default value in that pulldown will be "XML". If GnuCash sees any database drivers, the associated databases will show up as options on that menu; selecting "postgres" will allow the accounts to be saved into the selected PostgreSQL database.

A couple of related notes: GnuCash looks in /usr/lib/dbd for the database drivers. Fedora x86-64 puts them in /usr/lib64/dbd. The result is that GnuCash behaves as if the database option simply did not exist. Your editor retains a longstanding grudge against whoever came up with the /usr/lib64 idea; it seems to break every application which it comes into contact with at least once. The other thing to bear in mind is this: if you give GnuCash a password for access to the database, it will store that password - in plain text - in your .gconf directory.

The database-backed mode looks and works almost identically to the file-backed mode. The biggest visible difference is probably the lack of a "save" button; when working with a database, all changes are committed immediately. The program will also populate the working directory with files named like translog.20100517132703.log. Leaving log files lying around is a habit GnuCash has had for a long time, but, in the absence of an accounts file, GnuCash has to improvise when it comes to the naming and location of the log files.

Working from a database should offer some performance advantages when doing searches through large accounts, but that's not the real reason your editor is interested in the feature. What is far more compelling is (1) interoperability with other business processes, and (2) multi-user access to the accounting database. Unfortunately, GnuCash 2.4 does not seem to properly support either of those features.

Even a small business like LWN generates thousands of transactions over the course of a year. Unsurprisingly, it can be quite difficult to find anybody who is interested in typing all of those transactions into the accounting system - especially when "the computer" already knows all about them. In the current system, getting this information into the accounting database is done through a bunch of glue scripts and the always hair-raising QuickBooks import process. Certainly it would be nicer to just store that data directly into the accounting database.

This sort of direct storage is certainly achievable with GnuCash, but it won't be easy. The database schema is surprisingly hard to find; there is a version of it available in an old mailing list posting, but that's about it. Said schema is heavily reliant on GnuCash's "GUID" type - a 32-character ASCII representation of a 16-byte internal object identifier. So even storing a simple transaction requires generating new GUIDs and digging around to find the other GUIDs necessary to tie the transaction in properly. It is, in other words, messy, error-prone, and just crying for a nice API that could be called at a higher level. One assumes that said API will exist in library form someday, but it is not there now.

Parallel access is not there either; the FAQ is clear on the subject:

Even the dbi (SQL) backend which will appear in the upcoming 2.4 release is currently not designed for true multi-user access. Trying to work with multiple users at the same time in the same database can cause data loss. You can however share the database with different users, provided you ensure serialized, exclusive access.

This makes storing the accounts in a centrally-located database actively dangerous. If GnuCash cannot have two clients running safely with the same database, it should go out of its way to prevent that from happening (as it does with the file backend). But there are no checks for concurrent access in the current 2.3.12 development release.

While GnuCash does have some support for dealing with various tax regimes, it's still not where it needs to be to displace other applications. Among other things, it simply has no provision for storing some of the required information. LWN, being a US-based business, needs to track which of its authors needs to receive 1099 forms at the end of the year and produce those forms at the right time. The production side could perhaps be made to work relatively easily: GnuCash has a scripting engine which enables the creation of custom reports - as long as the user is not afraid of programming in Scheme. But, without the ability to track who needs those forms (and their tax numbers), the report generator simply lacks the information it needs.

Time for one final grumble. In current stable GnuCash, the QIF importer (useful for importing credit card transactions, for example) is fast, efficient, and flexible. In 2.3, importing has turned into a slow, click-intensive, error-prone process. Users are supposed to classify transactions without seeing the amount of each, for some strange reason. In general, GnuCash is moving forward in this release, but importing transactions has regressed.

Import dialogs notwithstanding, the general appearance of GnuCash has changed little in this cycle. It remains the solid, workhorse financial management program that your editor has used for years. For those who would like to see a bigger change, there is something on the horizon, though it doesn't look like it will be ready for the 2.4 release. The Cutecash project has set itself the goal of taking the GnuCash engine and putting a Qt-based interface onto it. It will be interesting to see where the developers go with this project.

Meanwhile, lest your editor seem just a little too grumpy, let it be said that GnuCash seems to be headed in the right direction. It has been more than good enough for most personal finance management for some time, and it is slowly developing the features it will need to compete in the business area. One of these years it should start displacing proprietary accounting tools in a serious way.


(Log in to post comments)

Looking forward to GnuCash 2.4

Posted May 18, 2010 19:30 UTC (Tue) by BackSeat (subscriber, #1886) [Link]

A decent, not-aimed-at-accountants Linux accounts package would be very welcome. I suspect that part of the reason this has not yet appeared is the not inconsiderable differences in the accounting (especially tax) rules between jurisdictions. Like LWN, the only non-Free program my company uses is Quickbooks, and I despise Intuit's attitude towards those of us that pay it money.

Looking forward to GnuCash 2.4

Posted May 18, 2010 21:09 UTC (Tue) by nybble41 (subscriber, #55106) [Link]

Have you looked at KMyMoney (http://kmymoney2.sourceforge.net/)?

KMyMoney

Posted May 18, 2010 21:23 UTC (Tue) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link]

I have. KMyMoney has developed into a very nice personal finance program, but that project has not really tried to address the business accounting problem.

Looking forward to GnuCash 2.4

Posted May 18, 2010 21:41 UTC (Tue) by dskoll (subscriber, #1630) [Link]

We use LedgerSMB. It's quirky and I would not trust it to be our official reporting system for tax returns (I outsource that to an accountant), but for keeping track of invoices, payments, etc. it's adequate.

Looking forward to GnuCash 2.4

Posted May 19, 2010 0:22 UTC (Wed) by rahvin (subscriber, #16953) [Link]

This is offtopic: but I have to say Intuit does actually listen to input. I made a comment one year about the 401k system in quicken being a steaming pile and they fixed it dramatically, covering every feature I reported missing in the next release (this was many years ago, probably a decade or so). If you have issues with Intuit software have you bothered reporting the issue to them?

If you are referring to the DRM and EULA mistake they made a few years ago, they did fix it the next year and actually expanded the EULA to give the users more rights (not commenting on EULA's, proprietary software or windows in general).

Unfortunately (and I don't think I'm alone here) I feel trapped in Quicken as it's the only software I've found with the features I need, I enjoy the news reports reviews on GnuCash though, I hope it gets the features I need eventually and I can dump Quicken and import the 15+ years of information I have in Quicken into a non-proprietary format.

Looking forward to GnuCash 2.4

Posted May 19, 2010 9:16 UTC (Wed) by philipstorry (subscriber, #45926) [Link]

At least you have the option of Quicken.

Here in the UK, Intuit stopped producing Quicken back in 2005. I got a letter in the post, a CD with a final update, and that was my lot. Not great, considering I'd bought a new version each year since 1998.

Since then I've done my accounts on the back of envelopes and in quick-and-dirty spreadsheet models, and have just recently become frustrated enough with that to want to evaluate the Linux options.

But I must admit I'm still a bit bitter about it. I can't quite forgive Quicken for just giving up on the UK market.

It was, I admit, a major factor in my migration to Linux from Windows. I'd tired of Windows for numerous reasons, and looked at both Mac and Linux, and realised that a decent Linux distribution was less likely to have products/projects disappear due to its open-source nature.

Lie fallow, yes. But if there's demand, someone may pick the project back up, even if it requires forking it.

The worst of it for me is that I really liked Quicken. It was a nice balance of features and ease of use. It doesn't yet have a decent equivalent on Linux that I've found. And if I could run it under Wine or VMware, I would. But in this country, I don't even have the option.

So funnily enough, I'm still a bit annoyed with Intuit...

Looking forward to GnuCash 2.4

Posted May 19, 2010 17:01 UTC (Wed) by jsatchell (guest, #6236) [Link]

I'm fairly sure that at least some of the Sage products can run under Linux, although they seem to keep very quite about this. Maybe one of their offerings will help.

Looking forward to GnuCash 2.4

Posted May 23, 2010 14:59 UTC (Sun) by philipstorry (subscriber, #45926) [Link]

Thanks.

After my Quicken experience, I'm not eager to lock up my data in a proprietary program again.

But it's always good to have the option should I find I need an accountant. Most accountants are much more familiar with Sage, so if I start my own business it's good to know I'll be OK with wine. :-)

Looking forward to GnuCash 2.4

Posted May 20, 2010 21:06 UTC (Thu) by rahvin (subscriber, #16953) [Link]

I'm sorry, I didn't realize they ended support in the UK. What did the end of support do to the software? I'm curious because you could still buy it, just can't get support from Intuit. I'm curious what features of the software went missing that UK users needed that us Yanks don't, I'm guessing the pound isn't a usable currency but not sure on that because Yanks could have money in pounds in UK banks. So, if you have used it since they ended support what features did you lose?

This is actually a fairly good example of why FOSS is better than proprietary.

Looking forward to GnuCash 2.4

Posted May 23, 2010 15:07 UTC (Sun) by philipstorry (subscriber, #45926) [Link]

Online features - bank integration and so forth - suffered. And Quicken always used to come in a couple of different versions, one of which had a tax preparation program. That needs yearly updating, and the cessation of development made that useless.

The pound is still a usable currency, AFAIK. But the US version isn't localised properly, either. In the UK, we perform checks and cash cheques, and we quite like it that way. And we all checking accounts current accounts, for example.

And we couldn't buy it after a short while either. There seems to have been a 2009 version on Amazon.co.uk, but I'm not sure if that's just a direct US import. Curiously, all versions of Quicken seem to be out of stock currently regardless of version, with the exception of a few second-hand copies of Quicken 2000. ;-)

Looking forward to GnuCash 2.4

Posted May 19, 2010 2:01 UTC (Wed) by NicDumZ (guest, #65935) [Link]

Yes, your guess is partly true. There are actually a bunch of Free softwares that have accounting features, but if you want to be generic and have an implementation that can apply to any use case, you have to think in very broad terms, and I think that it leads us to ERP class of software.

There are at the moment at least two decent free ERP softwares, and I work for one of them. For the sake of neutrality I wont quote names, but it's not hard to find.

The major issue is however the configuration, that takes a lot of time. I think that maybe the original author or the commenter do not have the complexity of such softwares in mind: when you have to code an elegant, generic accounting software, that can do advanced imports, transactions, with concurrent accesses, and whatever features you need, you just end up with a huge set of generic blocks, and gluing them together to fit the end-user needs takes days of consulting work.

Of course, if you need an US-only accounting program aimed at small businesses, that must be doable, with very little end-user configuration. But if you think of something that can suit all customers, all over the world, in (not all, but ) most of the business ranges, you either have to choose to have very limited features, or very long configuration time requiring various coding and scripting.

Knowing that I have had to work for the other complex option, on the "configurator" and on the developer side, I am very excited about GnuCash: it is extremely easy-to-use, and has limited but quite powerful features. It is perfect for my personal accounting, and I would not like this to change to a more advanced/complex interface.
Now that OpenOffice is decently usable, my relatives used to use the "but Microsoft Money is not available on Linux" point to argue why they would not switch to Linux. I am happy that today I can point them to GnuCash, which is easy to set-up and to use. I would be disappointed to see this software evolve into a business-oriented software, with all the complexity that it necessarily induce.

Looking forward to GnuCash 2.4

Posted May 19, 2010 8:58 UTC (Wed) by philipstorry (subscriber, #45926) [Link]

Likewise, a decent not-aimed-at-accounting personal finance product like Quicken would be welcome too.

Finance programs on Linux can be divided into two broad groups:
* Accounting-based ones, which insist on accounts for everything and veer towards heavy categorisation, tax details, reconciliation and double-entry
* Personal finance ones, which are more about budgeting and ease of use

The accounting-style ones are more mature, but less pleasant to use. There's a new crop of personal finance ones following in their wake, but they don't seem mature enough to me.

This observation comes from trying numerous accounts packages recently on the Ubuntu 10.04 beta, so all the packages were fairly up to date. Everything was either overkill for my simple needs, or unstable/too immature.

(For example, GnuCash and Grisbi were overkill. KMyMoney crashed repeatedly when importing data from my bank and wxBanker looks great, but is very basic at the moment.)

Time will fix this, I'm sure. But I suspect it will fix the personal finance side sooner than it fixes the accounting side, I'm afraid. Itch scratching, and all that...

HomeBank

Posted May 23, 2010 12:05 UTC (Sun) by Velmont (guest, #46433) [Link]

I use HomeBank, it's quite nice. I've written a few scripts for it so that it works almost automatically with my bank.

I find it easy to use, but the reporting isn't really good; it can't print out information. So I'll guess I have to make a python HomeBank-XML-to-OpenOffice-converter so I can use OO.org to do printouts of reports.

HomeBank

Posted May 23, 2010 15:13 UTC (Sun) by philipstorry (subscriber, #45926) [Link]

Homebank wasn't too bad. I just didn't mention it because I didn't want the comment to turn into a "quick review of all accounting software"... ;-)

I felt much as you do - Homebank seemed fine except for the reporting side.

To be honest, having looked at all the options, I'm now thinking of writing my own little system in Python. Nothing fancy, just enough to scratch my own itch. Plus, if I do it right, I can access my accounts any way I choose to write a client for - be it web, console (via SSH) or gtk/qt desktop client.

Don't expect me to open-source it though. Like much of what I write, it'd be too embarrassing to show the source in public!

Xtuple Postbooks

Posted May 29, 2010 7:59 UTC (Sat) by ejmarkow (guest, #56170) [Link]

An excellent (and the best I've used) Open Source Accounting / ERP software package using the PostGreSQL database is Xtuple Postbooks. Download the installer at: http://www.xtuple.org

Ledger for the win!

Posted May 18, 2010 21:45 UTC (Tue) by amd (guest, #37690) [Link]

If you are looking for a more programmatic approach to handling large numbers of transactions, have you considered http://wiki.github.com/jwiegley/ledger/, which runs quite nicely on Linux?

Looking forward to GnuCash 2.4

Posted May 18, 2010 21:52 UTC (Tue) by spaetz (subscriber, #32870) [Link]

GnuCash always has that potential to be "the killer app" in its category (HCBI banking, reports, easy entry). However, I find that the often glacial pace of development (sometimes due to commitments to backwards compatability with ancient versions of guile and whatnot) does not inspire lot of trust quick improvements. The issues you listed (undocumented and obscure APIs and database schemes, data base connectivity without multi-user transaction support build in from the outset) don't increase my trust in it either.

Don't get me wrong. I believe that these guys are capable coders and I can't blame them for not scratching my itches. But somehow, every time I looked at GnuCash during the last, what?, 5 years, it always seems to be in a transition phase catching up from some ancient technology.... I always went away from it saying, well in a year or 2 it might be ready. So far it has never been comfortable enough for my (modest) purposes.

Scripting

Posted May 19, 2010 3:43 UTC (Wed) by smurf (subscriber, #17840) [Link]

GnuCash 2.4 supports Python scripting. That should help a lot.

Documentation is a large problem. Digging around in the source repository you can find out-of-date READMEs and whatnot that have not been touched since 1.6 or so. *Sigh*.

It's also 100% silent on how to convert an existing database to SQL. No surprise there.

Scripting

Posted May 20, 2010 17:24 UTC (Thu) by smurf (subscriber, #17840) [Link]

> It's also 100% silent on how to convert an existing database to SQL. No surprise there.

Found it. You use the "save as" dialog and select "mysql" from the pop-up.

Now I finally can throw away my custom gnucash2mysql exporter script. Yay.

NB: With auto-incrementing transaction IDs instead of GUIDs (and of course unmodifyable transactions ...), true SQL multiuser would be dirt cheap. But that will need to wait for 2.6, at least.

Looking forward to GnuCash 2.4

Posted May 19, 2010 20:15 UTC (Wed) by sailorxyz (subscriber, #52650) [Link]

There is already quite a nice accounting package available that runs under Linux. Quasar Accounting from Linux Canada is certainly capable of running a small business.

It's not free software but if you buy the license you can get the source. It uses Postgre as the DB and is not unreasonably priced. User documentation is out standing. I am surprised that our grumpy editor has not yet looked at it.

See: http://www.linuxcanada.com/

Paul Thompson

Quasar Accounting

Posted May 20, 2010 4:03 UTC (Thu) by Webexcess (subscriber, #197) [Link]

I would second that recommendation.

The UI is a bit odd, and it is commercial software now (a previous version was GPL), but its database is nice and easy to work with. Also their biggest paying customers seem to be large retail shops with many POS devices, so the multi-user side is very well tested.

Quasar was GPL, now proprietary

Posted May 22, 2010 8:57 UTC (Sat) by hackerb9 (guest, #21928) [Link]

I had never heard of a GPL project going full on proprietary before so I checked out their web page to see what happened.

Oddly, their news page still has a January 2005 press release trumpeting the move to GPL but there is no mention of switching back to a proprietary license. I double-checked the license and Quasar 2.0 is indeed proprietary. The source code is available for purchase, but it is under a look-don't-touch license.

The last GPL'd release, version 1.4.7, is dated 6/24/2005. Meaning the program only lived under the GPL for six months. Well... perhaps longer depending on how you count its living-dead status from 2005 to 2008. After version 1.4.7 there are no releases for two and a half years, until version 2.0 in January 2008.

So what happened? I have no knowledge, but my guess is that LinuxCanada didn't build up a community. Perhaps they didn't realize a community wouldn't spontaneously generate from magic pixie-dust and a review on LWN. Or maybe they underestimated the draw on developers from competing GPL programs like LedgerSMB and SQL-Ledger. Or maybe the one developer of Quasar, Phil Tonnellier, had other things going on in his life and simply wanted a break from Quasar. If somebody knows the truth, I'd be curious to hear it.

Looking forward to GnuCash 2.4

Posted May 20, 2010 1:32 UTC (Thu) by Baylink (subscriber, #755) [Link]

> when working with a database, all changes are committed immediately.

Yet another "accounting" program that doesn't understand that batch edit reports are a feature, not a bug, huh? <sigh>

Looking forward to GnuCash 2.4

Posted May 20, 2010 16:19 UTC (Thu) by smurf (subscriber, #17840) [Link]

> Yet another "accounting" program that doesn't understand that batch edit reports are a feature, not a bug, huh? <sigh>

Well, yeah. GnuCash is not, and never has been, a proper business accounting program. It simply doesn't enforce a couple of very basic rules which shall guarantee that Joe Accountant can't muck with the books after the fact.

Examples:

* In a business accounting program, transactions may not be deleted or modified. (Made a mistake? Add another transaction which corrects it.)

* After you close the books for <date>, no transaction in or before <date> may be entered.

* The accounting program shall log when a record has been entered.

* Unbalanced transactions (i.e. the sum is not zero) are fixed by silently

* <insert another couple of non-enforced business accounting rules here>.

GnuCash, on the other hand, warns about modifying reconciled (parts of) transations, but happily allows you to modify them anyway. It doesn't warn if you insert records that are dated before reconciled transactions. It doesn't handle concurrent access to the backend SQL database (which requires some, but not _that_ much, careful programming). And so on.

One may try to enforce these rules with some dedicated chunk of middleware, or with stored procedures, or whatever. Until then ...

There oughta be a law...

Posted May 22, 2010 10:10 UTC (Sat) by hackerb9 (guest, #21928) [Link]

After reading many grumpy editor articles seeking replacements for QuickBooks (how many years has it been?) and why QB has a lock on the market, I have a possible, if not probable, solution. It seems to me that the big problem is that somebody needs to be paid, every year, to translate legalese like the 1099 form into code. And, for some strange reason, there aren't a lot of hackers volunteering for that fun, fun project.

I think a neat solution which would end up saving everyone (except Intuit) money would be if there was a meta-law stating that

any law which can be implemented algorithmically, must provide a reference implementation in machine-readable source code.
For example, much of the barely-English verbiage in the US tax code could be implemented as a spreadsheet. English is not a programming language and shouldn't be abused with grotesqueries like, "If line 38 is over $109,475, or you provided housing to a person displaced by Hurricane Katrina, see page 37. Otherwise, multiply $3,200 by the total number of exemptions claimed on line 6d."

There'd be a cost for the government to write the reference implementation, but that cost would be miniscule compared to what's already being spent creating a new law. (Who gets paid more per hour: lawyers or programmers?) And the government would save money on not having to send so many letters saying, "Oops, you filled in your form incorrectly."

I have no illusion that such a meta-law will happen soon at the federal level, but maybe, if people start agitating for it on a city and county level, eventually it will catch on and go national. It just makes so much more sense to have laws that are going to be converted into code anyway clearly defined in a machine parseable format in the first place.

The only downside I see to such a law is that it might encourage governments to make even more complicated tax codes than they already have.

--b9

P.S. I think the reason tax law in the US is called the "US Tax Code" is not because it is written like computer code but because it is encrypted. ;-)

There oughta be a law...

Posted May 24, 2010 6:24 UTC (Mon) by tonyblackwell (subscriber, #43641) [Link]

I'm sure I saw something in just the last month about law expressed as computer code. Something about banking or stock market rules?? Anyone remember the reference? On LWN?

There oughta be a law...

Posted May 24, 2010 12:48 UTC (Mon) by andrel (subscriber, #5166) [Link]

On LWN: SEC to require filings in Python?

There oughta be a law...

Posted May 27, 2010 6:39 UTC (Thu) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

If the 'filings in Python' thing reminded me of Charlie Stross's _Accelerando_, the idea of law in code reminds me of something much worse: remember how the Mailman did his damage in _True Names_? Now imagine if we don't have convenient transapients to fix the problem for us, only crackers and criminal organizations breaking in and changing the implementation of the law on the sly. The whole point of law is that it has grey areas, and that it is focused on intent. Computers *have* no intent. Yes, you can corrupt humans too, but at least a corrupt human *knows* he is corrupt...

There oughta be a law...

Posted Jan 2, 2011 17:01 UTC (Sun) by PO8 (guest, #41661) [Link]

…and you've inserted a serious spoiler for True Names into this thread for the folks who haven't read it yet. Perhaps our Editor could delete or modify your comment?

There oughta be a law...

Posted Jan 8, 2011 23:11 UTC (Sat) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

Sorry, I was kind of assuming that everyone on Earth with any interest in the subject had read it by now. It's nearly thirty years old and has been anthologized about ten times in major collections. (Also, it's not a particularly major spoiler.)

lib64

Posted May 22, 2010 17:34 UTC (Sat) by salimma (subscriber, #34460) [Link]

> Your editor retains a longstanding grudge against whoever came up with the
> /usr/lib64 idea; it seems to break every application which it comes into
> contact with at least once

I see it the other way around: multilib exposes the bad practice of developers who hardcode locations instead of honoring what options are passed during the configure process (--prefix, --libdir, etc.).

Of course, users of multilib-capable distributions get to be the guinea pigs... I personally prefer the OpenStep way of having an $arch subdirectory for every architecture. No reason this cannot be grafted on top of FHS -- in fact, GNUstep supports this. Hard to get buy-in from Linux distributions though.

lib64

Posted May 23, 2010 19:35 UTC (Sun) by rwmj (subscriber, #5474) [Link]

If only multilib worked and wasn't broken by design. For example, the way it doesn't work at all (and corrupts files) if two RPM transactions add or remove a multilib file.

Looking forward to GnuCash 2.4

Posted May 22, 2010 22:48 UTC (Sat) by harm (subscriber, #6418) [Link]

It is hard to trust your data to an accounting app that uses floating point calculations internally. Isn't such an app the schoolbook example of where _not_ to use floats ?....

Looking forward to GnuCash 2.4

Posted May 23, 2010 13:57 UTC (Sun) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

I have worked on several systems used by traders trading on major stock exchanges. Perhaps one fifth of those systems had gone to the trouble of using decimal floats or some other non-IEEE high-precision format. The rest, well, they *should* have done the same, but they generally waved away the occasional imprecision as unavoidable or downgraded the bug report until it was invisibly low-priority.

The world is suckier than you think it is.

Dolibarr

Posted Jan 2, 2011 14:48 UTC (Sun) by jerume (guest, #56298) [Link]

I recommend Dolibarr. A very nice accounting, stock, and service system.

Dolibarr ERP/CRM is a software built by modules addition (you enable only features you need), to manage small or medium companies, freelancers or foundations. We can say Dolibarr is an ERP or CRM (or both depending on activated modules).

Regards,

Jérôme Gaulin.

Copyright © 2010, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds