Thanks! It also looks like it is also a case of RTFM.
https://lists.gnucash.org/docs/C/gnucash-guide/basics-backup1.html
Looks like this would be another way to recover.
Thanks so much for your detailed explanation.
/Ed
On Thu, Sep 19, 2024, at 10:12 AM, John Ralls wrote:
> It looks like you l
I am on Windows 10, 64-bit, GnuWin32: DiffUtils version 2.8.7, and was viewing
an Account Report. Instead of closing it I must have accidentally closed GC.
I restarted GC, the GC banner showed, then a window saying that GC could not
obtain the lock for Household.gnucash. I said to "Open Anywa
>
>
>
> On April 9, 2022 5:03:59 AM "Ed Reeder" wrote:
>
>> Example:
>> I have previously entered a check into gnucash:
>> Num=205, Description=Smith Plumbing, Withdrawal=100.00
>>
>> My bank's OFX transaction has:
>>
>&
When that happens to me I will discover that I entered a transaction
incorrectly. I would check each GC transaction against the banks.
On Mon, Apr 11, 2022, at 2:36 PM, Rich Shepard wrote:
> Every now and then one of my bank accounts doesn't reconcile because what
> the bank shows differs from w
Thanks! Will give it a try.
On Sat, Apr 9, 2022, at 3:48 AM, Dan Black wrote:
> On the matching screen, select C (clear) instead of U+C (update and clear).
>
>
>
> On April 9, 2022 5:03:59 AM "Ed Reeder" wrote:
>
>> Example:
>> I have previously
Thanks for taking the time to reply. It is appreciated.
On Sat, Apr 9, 2022, at 7:26 AM, Michael or Penny Novack wrote:
> On 4/6/2022 3:53 PM, Ed Reeder wrote:
>> Example:
>> I have previously entered a check into gnucash:
>> Num=205, Description=Smith Plumbing, Withdrawal=1
Example:
I have previously entered a check into gnucash:
Num=205, Description=Smith Plumbing, Withdrawal=100.00
My bank's OFX transaction has:
CHECK
-100.00
205
CHECK # 205
When I import the OFX file and and match its transaction with the previously
entered check transaction the "
GnuCash development team announces GnuCash 3.903, the first
> testing release for what will soon be GnuCash 4.0."
> ^^^
>
> It's actually the second, but still...
>
> Regards,
> John Ralls
>
>
