I recently posted a bug report to Rootsmagic (for about the 3rd time
over several years) because RM gives me an error "Range Check error"
when failing to generate an index with a large descendants list. It
works OK if I start with a more recent ancestor, but if I start with
my earliest Hoffpauir, the report fails. The programmers have
acknowledged, and reproduced the error with my data file, but haven't
yet fixed the problem. I'm beginning to think they never will.
So my question for Legacy users... will Legacy produce a report
consisting of simply a list of all the descendants (and their spouses)
of a given ancestor, along with basic b. m. d. & place information,
for a large number of descendants. There are over 19,000 direct
descendants (and spouses) of the "original" Hoffpauir in my database,
and because the descendant report tends to duplicate individuals if
they are descended from the originator by more than one path, there
are many more names in the report than actual individuals. And if it
will create such a report, will it also include an index?
It works OK if I start with a more recent ancestor, but if I start with
my earliest Hoffpauir, the report fails. The programmers have
acknowledged, and reproduced the error with my data file, but haven't
yet fixed the problem. I'm beginning to think they never will.
I recently posted a bug report to Rootsmagic (for about the 3rd time
over several years) because RM gives me an error "Range Check error"
when failing to generate an index with a large descendants list. It
works OK if I start with a more recent ancestor, but if I start with
my earliest Hoffpauir, the report fails. The programmers have
acknowledged, and reproduced the error with my data file, but haven't
yet fixed the problem. I'm beginning to think they never will.
So my question for Legacy users... will Legacy produce a report
consisting of simply a list of all the descendants (and their spouses)
of a given ancestor, along with basic b. m. d. & place information,
for a large number of descendants. There are over 19,000 direct
descendants (and spouses) of the "original" Hoffpauir in my database,
and because the descendant report tends to duplicate individuals if
they are descended from the originator by more than one path, there
are many more names in the report than actual individuals. And if it
will create such a report, will it also include an index?
On Sun, 17 Jun 2018 16:04:18 -0500, Charlie Hoffpauir
<invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
It works OK if I start with a more recent ancestor, but if I start with
my earliest Hoffpauir, the report fails. The programmers have
acknowledged, and reproduced the error with my data file, but haven't
yet fixed the problem. I'm beginning to think they never will.
I don't know the percentage of genealogists who have such a vast
number of people in their data base - it must be pretty small.
NOT BEING A PROGRAMMER seems to me like fixing the problem would be >elementary. Back in the days of Family Origins Bruce incorporated
several of my suggestions. Your wall may be that the programming
effort is not worth it for one person (who questioned).
Not that you asked but seems like you could segregate by generations.
Why does it have to be a single continuous list?
Hugh
OK, RM support contacted me and advised running a built-in tool that I
had not used before, and this seems to have fixed everything! I can
now get my list, with an index!
Since our earliest ancestor lived in the 1735-1827 period and had three >surviving offspring, the family has been multiplying like rabbits!
OK, RM support contacted me and advised running a built-in tool that I
had not used before, and this seems to have fixed everything! I can
now get my list, with an index!
On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:49:25 -0500, Charlie Hoffpauir
<invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
OK, RM support contacted me and advised running a built-in tool that I
had not used before, and this seems to have fixed everything! I can
now get my list, with an index!
What is the tool, in case any of the rest of us need to use it?
Charlie seems to be having problems connecting to the NG, and replied
to this in e-mail.
For what it's worth, I have the full version of RM 6, and the
"Essentials" version of RM 7. RM 6 will not connect to FamilySearch,
but RM 7 does. As the data file is the same in both versions I switch
between them, depending on what I want to do.
On Tue, 19 Jun 2018 18:54:32 +0200, Steve Hayes
<hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:
Charlie seems to be having problems connecting to the NG, and replied
to this in e-mail.
I thought one now had to subscribe to Facebook, Twitter or some such
social group to get the RM News Group. Subscribing to one of them
ain't NEVER gonna happen for me.
For what it's worth, I have the full version of RM 6, and the
"Essentials" version of RM 7. RM 6 will not connect to FamilySearch,
but RM 7 does. As the data file is the same in both versions I switch >>between them, depending on what I want to do.
I have full version RM 7 and Legacy 9. I don't understand not
upgrading every time.
Hugh
For what it's worth, I have the full version of RM 6, and the
"Essentials" version of RM 7. RM 6 will not connect to FamilySearch,
but RM 7 does. As the data file is the same in both versions I switch >>between them, depending on what I want to do.
I have full version RM 7 and Legacy 9. I don't understand not
upgrading every time.
On Tue, 19 Jun 2018 19:45:32 GMT, Eagle@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh
Sullivan) wrote:
For what it's worth, I have the full version of RM 6, and the >>>"Essentials" version of RM 7. RM 6 will not connect to FamilySearch,
but RM 7 does. As the data file is the same in both versions I switch >>>between them, depending on what I want to do.
I have full version RM 7 and Legacy 9. I don't understand not
upgrading every time.
It's a matter of still owing the dentist.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 185 |
| Nodes: | 16 (1 / 15) |
| Uptime: | 87:41:01 |
| Calls: | 3,750 |
| Files: | 11,172 |
| Messages: | 3,462,270 |