After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 639287 - GnmExprEntry doesn't implement property 'editing-canceled'
GnmExprEntry doesn't implement property 'editing-canceled'
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: Gnumeric
Classification: Applications
Component: GUI Expression Entry Widget
git master
Other Linux
: Normal minor
: ---
Assigned To: Jon Kåre Hellan
Jody Goldberg
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2011-01-12 08:17 UTC by Andreas J. Guelzow
Modified: 2011-01-12 20:43 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---

Attachments
Proposed patch (1.37 KB, patch)
2011-01-12 13:41 UTC, Jean Bréfort 		committed Details | Review

Description Andreas J. Guelzow 2011-01-12 08:17:55 UTC 
Starting Gnumeric with glib from current git yields:

GLib-GObject-CRITICAL **: Object class GnmExprEntry doesn't implement property 'editing-canceled' from interface 'GtkCellEditable'
Comment 1 Jean Bréfort 2011-01-12 13:32:14 UTC 
This property exists only since gtk+-2.20. I ignore what happens if we override this propoerty with older gtk+.
Comment 2 Jean Bréfort 2011-01-12 13:37:37 UTC 
Tested that, and got:

GLib-GObject-WARNING **: IA__g_object_class_override_property: Can't find property to override for 'GnmExprEntry::editing-canceled'
Comment 3 Jean Bréfort 2011-01-12 13:41:28 UTC 
Created attachment 178131 [details] [review]
Proposed patch
Comment 4 Andreas J. Guelzow 2011-01-12 14:40:18 UTC 
Review of attachment 178131 [details] [review]:

looks good to me and tested with gtk+ from current git.
Comment 5 Jean Bréfort 2011-01-12 14:52:07 UTC 
This problem has been fixed in our software repository. The fix will go into the next software release. Thank you for your bug report.
Comment 6 Morten Welinder 2011-01-12 19:56:44 UTC 
That'll need to be a run-time check.
Comment 7 Jean Bréfort 2011-01-12 20:00:38 UTC 
You are right. The easiest way would be to do no test at all. A warning is annyoing but not harmful.
Comment 8 Morten Welinder 2011-01-12 20:10:02 UTC 
Can we test using g_object_class_find_property?
Comment 9 Jean Bréfort 2011-01-12 20:43:44 UTC 
We need g_object_interface_find_property.

This problem has been fixed in our software repository. The fix will go into the next software release. Thank you for your bug report.