Quantcast

corruption

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
8 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

corruption

Ben Clark
I last used Gramps 3 years ago (probably from Ubuntu 9.10) and got a great PDF after many dozens of hours inputting data.
I also exported the GEDCOM file and now, when I reopen the GED file on a new computer (Ubuntu 12.04) there are missing records and mashed relationships.
For example, my own record was AWOL and my wife was married to my great-great-great-grandfather.
Any thoughts on how this happened or what I might be able to do about it?
Thanks in advance,
Ben



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free Next-Gen Firewall Hardware Offer
Buy your Sophos next-gen firewall before the end March 2013
and get the hardware for free! Learn more.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/sophos-d2d-feb
_______________________________________________
Gramps-bugs mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-bugs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: corruption

Benny Malengier



2013/2/13 Ben Clark <[hidden email]>
I last used Gramps 3 years ago (probably from Ubuntu 9.10) and got a great PDF after many dozens of hours inputting data.
I also exported the GEDCOM file and now, when I reopen the GED file on a new computer (Ubuntu 12.04) there are missing records and mashed relationships.
For example, my own record was AWOL and my wife was married to my great-great-great-grandfather.
Any thoughts on how this happened or what I might be able to do about it?

GEDCOM is not the native format of Gramps, and over time many fixes in import and export happened.
I can only assume 3 years ago there where certain bugs in the export. Eg, it could be that you had by accident the same ID for you and your grandfather, and only one was exported, making your wif married with you. We would need to test with a version of 2009 if that was a bug then.

Have a look in the Gedcom if you are really not in it. If not, nothing can be done, it is a bug of 2009 with export to GEDCOM.
Do you not have an export to the Gramps format, which ends with .gramps or .xml ?

Benny
 
Thanks in advance,
Ben



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free Next-Gen Firewall Hardware Offer
Buy your Sophos next-gen firewall before the end March 2013
and get the hardware for free! Learn more.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/sophos-d2d-feb
_______________________________________________
Gramps-bugs mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-bugs



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free Next-Gen Firewall Hardware Offer
Buy your Sophos next-gen firewall before the end March 2013
and get the hardware for free! Learn more.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/sophos-d2d-feb
_______________________________________________
Gramps-bugs mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-bugs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: corruption

Ben Clark
My record is still there. There's hope!
Looking in plain text at my @I, I see an @F that I am still married to my wife and she does not appear in any other @F and we still have two CHIL's.
So the data appear to still be intact.

There are 362 Gramplets when I open the GED.
When I cat the ged file and grep INDI I get 443.
When I pipe that to sort & uniq I still get 443.

I tried a Tools -> Family Tree Repair -> Check & Repair database on a copy and it said "41 broken child-family links were fixed" and 4 corrupted family relationship fixed.
However the total number of people stayed the same.

Should I try to revert to a 2010 Gramps, open the GED and resave it in the Gramps format?
Or am I going to have to try and dummy up a PERL script to fix it?
Other thoughts welcome & thank you,
Ben


Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 15:28:50 +0100
Subject: Re: [Gramps-bugs] corruption
From: [hidden email]
To: [hidden email]
CC: [hidden email]




2013/2/13 Ben Clark <[hidden email]>
I last used Gramps 3 years ago (probably from Ubuntu 9.10) and got a great PDF after many dozens of hours inputting data.
I also exported the GEDCOM file and now, when I reopen the GED file on a new computer (Ubuntu 12.04) there are missing records and mashed relationships.
For example, my own record was AWOL and my wife was married to my great-great-great-grandfather.
Any thoughts on how this happened or what I might be able to do about it?

GEDCOM is not the native format of Gramps, and over time many fixes in import and export happened.
I can only assume 3 years ago there where certain bugs in the export. Eg, it could be that you had by accident the same ID for you and your grandfather, and only one was exported, making your wif married with you. We would need to test with a version of 2009 if that was a bug then.

Have a look in the Gedcom if you are really not in it. If not, nothing can be done, it is a bug of 2009 with export to GEDCOM.
Do you not have an export to the Gramps format, which ends with .gramps or .xml ?

Benny
 
Thanks in advance,
Ben

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free Next-Gen Firewall Hardware Offer
Buy your Sophos next-gen firewall before the end March 2013
and get the hardware for free! Learn more.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/sophos-d2d-feb
_______________________________________________
Gramps-bugs mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-bugs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: corruption

Benny Malengier
Tim,

Having worked on the GEDCOM import/export, what would you suggest Ben does?
I find it strange he could have 443 people in the GED and only 362 in Gramps.

Ben, what version of Gramps was that? A virtualbox with old ubuntu and that version of Gramps would indeed allow export to native gramps, provided you still have the database. You might actually be able to just open the database in current Gramps, that depends on the version of Gramps you where using in 2009.

Benny


2013/2/14 Ben Clark <[hidden email]>
My record is still there. There's hope!
Looking in plain text at my @I, I see an @F that I am still married to my wife and she does not appear in any other @F and we still have two CHIL's.
So the data appear to still be intact.

There are 362 Gramplets when I open the GED.
When I cat the ged file and grep INDI I get 443.
When I pipe that to sort & uniq I still get 443.

I tried a Tools -> Family Tree Repair -> Check & Repair database on a copy and it said "41 broken child-family links were fixed" and 4 corrupted family relationship fixed.
However the total number of people stayed the same.

Should I try to revert to a 2010 Gramps, open the GED and resave it in the Gramps format?
Or am I going to have to try and dummy up a PERL script to fix it?
Other thoughts welcome & thank you,
Ben


Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 15:28:50 +0100
Subject: Re: [Gramps-bugs] corruption
From: [hidden email]
To: [hidden email]
CC: [hidden email]




2013/2/13 Ben Clark <[hidden email]>
I last used Gramps 3 years ago (probably from Ubuntu 9.10) and got a great PDF after many dozens of hours inputting data.
I also exported the GEDCOM file and now, when I reopen the GED file on a new computer (Ubuntu 12.04) there are missing records and mashed relationships.
For example, my own record was AWOL and my wife was married to my great-great-great-grandfather.
Any thoughts on how this happened or what I might be able to do about it?

GEDCOM is not the native format of Gramps, and over time many fixes in import and export happened.
I can only assume 3 years ago there where certain bugs in the export. Eg, it could be that you had by accident the same ID for you and your grandfather, and only one was exported, making your wif married with you. We would need to test with a version of 2009 if that was a bug then.

Have a look in the Gedcom if you are really not in it. If not, nothing can be done, it is a bug of 2009 with export to GEDCOM.
Do you not have an export to the Gramps format, which ends with .gramps or .xml ?

Benny
 
Thanks in advance,
Ben


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free Next-Gen Firewall Hardware Offer
Buy your Sophos next-gen firewall before the end March 2013
and get the hardware for free! Learn more.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/sophos-d2d-feb
_______________________________________________
Gramps-bugs mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-bugs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: corruption

Ben Clark
My 99% certainty WAG at my previous Gramps version is 3.1.3 since I was doing this in Feb of 2010 and my PDF is timestamped March 7, 2010
http://sourceforge.net/projects/gramps/files/Stable/ says
3.2.0 2010-03-15

 11,357 downloads
3.1.3 2009-12-29
And since the Ubuntu Distro's come out in April and October I was almost certainly using the 9.10 which is not downloadable any more.
http://mirror.anl.gov/pub/ubuntu-iso/DVDs/ubuntu/

Current Ubuntu 12.04 LTS:
GRAMPS: 3.3.1-1
Python: 2.7.3 (default, Aug  1 2012, 05:16:07) [...
BSDDB: 5.1.2 (5, 1, 25)
LANG: en_US.UTF-8
OS: Linux
Distribution: 3.2.0-37-generic-pae

My GED file is 6874 lines long. When I open it in the new Gramps and export it in the GED format, a diff between the 2 files yields 5181 lines different. However if I sort the files before the diff it's only 1849 lines.

All the new records have 4 digit numbers.
> 0 @F0024@ FAM
> 0 @F0025@ FAM
...
> 0 @I0009@ INDI
> 0 @I0010@ INDI
...
> 1 CHIL @I0121@
> 1 CHIL @I0122@


Some of the old only have 1, 2 or 3 digit numbers.
< 0 @F17@ FAM
< 0 @F18@ FAM
...
< 0 @I100@ INDI
< 0 @I101@ INDI
...
< 1 CHIL @I1@
< 1 CHIL @I10@

Would simply making all ID's 4 digits with a little script fix this issue?
Thanks & much appreciate the pointers; learning a lot today!
Ben



Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 16:35:38 +0100
Subject: Re: [Gramps-bugs] corruption
From: [hidden email]
To: [hidden email]; [hidden email]
CC: [hidden email]

Tim,

Having worked on the GEDCOM import/export, what would you suggest Ben does?
I find it strange he could have 443 people in the GED and only 362 in Gramps.

Ben, what version of Gramps was that? A virtualbox with old ubuntu and that version of Gramps would indeed allow export to native gramps, provided you still have the database. You might actually be able to just open the database in current Gramps, that depends on the version of Gramps you where using in 2009.

Benny


2013/2/14 Ben Clark <[hidden email]>
My record is still there. There's hope!
Looking in plain text at my @I, I see an @F that I am still married to my wife and she does not appear in any other @F and we still have two CHIL's.
So the data appear to still be intact.

There are 362 Gramplets when I open the GED.
When I cat the ged file and grep INDI I get 443.
When I pipe that to sort & uniq I still get 443.

I tried a Tools -> Family Tree Repair -> Check & Repair database on a copy and it said "41 broken child-family links were fixed" and 4 corrupted family relationship fixed.
However the total number of people stayed the same.

Should I try to revert to a 2010 Gramps, open the GED and resave it in the Gramps format?
Or am I going to have to try and dummy up a PERL script to fix it?
Other thoughts welcome & thank you,
Ben


Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 15:28:50 +0100
Subject: Re: [Gramps-bugs] corruption
From: [hidden email]
To: [hidden email]
CC: [hidden email]




2013/2/13 Ben Clark <[hidden email]>
I last used Gramps 3 years ago (probably from Ubuntu 9.10) and got a great PDF after many dozens of hours inputting data.
I also exported the GEDCOM file and now, when I reopen the GED file on a new computer (Ubuntu 12.04) there are missing records and mashed relationships.
For example, my own record was AWOL and my wife was married to my great-great-great-grandfather.
Any thoughts on how this happened or what I might be able to do about it?

GEDCOM is not the native format of Gramps, and over time many fixes in import and export happened.
I can only assume 3 years ago there where certain bugs in the export. Eg, it could be that you had by accident the same ID for you and your grandfather, and only one was exported, making your wif married with you. We would need to test with a version of 2009 if that was a bug then.

Have a look in the Gedcom if you are really not in it. If not, nothing can be done, it is a bug of 2009 with export to GEDCOM.
Do you not have an export to the Gramps format, which ends with .gramps or .xml ?

Benny
 
Thanks in advance,
Ben


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free Next-Gen Firewall Hardware Offer
Buy your Sophos next-gen firewall before the end March 2013
and get the hardware for free! Learn more.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/sophos-d2d-feb
_______________________________________________
Gramps-bugs mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-bugs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: corruption

Ben Clark

BTW The GED file indicates I was using VERS 3.1.2-1


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free Next-Gen Firewall Hardware Offer
Buy your Sophos next-gen firewall before the end March 2013
and get the hardware for free! Learn more.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/sophos-d2d-feb
_______________________________________________
Gramps-bugs mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-bugs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: corruption

Tim Lyons
Administrator
In reply to this post by Benny Malengier
I wonder whether you have 'conflicting' people IDs like I001 together with I1? I suspect that IDs like that together with importing using Gramps 3.3.x could produce errors like those you see.

I have fixed a number of bugs in GEDCOM import to do with how the IDs are processed. Some of the fixes were around Feb/Mar 2012, so if you are currently using Gramps 3.3.x, the fixes are probably not in there.

So the best thing to do would be to get a more recent version of Gramps (3.4.2) and try with that.

I don't think there is any point at all in trying to get hold of an older version of Gramps and trying to import the GEDCOM into that. I suspect that there is nothing really wrong with the GEDCOM file you have, it is just the import process, and older versions of Gramps are likely to be worse at import rather than better.

There is a small chance that you could fool the Gramps import process using the version of Gramps that you have, by changing the Preferences->ID Formats so that the start letter for Person is not I, but something else (say XX%04d). If you also have problems with other objects, then you would need to change the ID format for those too (to something that is not already in your GEDCOM, and something that is not the same as any other IDs). Then import the GEDCOM into an empty Family Tree. If this does work, then it might give you confidence that the data is actually intact in your GEDCOM file. However, I would NOT, repeat NOT, recommend that you carry on using a database produced in this way - the possibility of hidden problems is just too great.


Once you have restored your database, don't forget that to back it up, or to export it so that you can use it in other versions of Gramps, you should export the data to Gramps XML format, NOT to GEDCOM, because GEDCOM does not preserve all the information in the Gramps database (though GEDCOM is of course the only way to export at least some of the data to another genealogy program).


I presume that you no longer have the ~/.gramps directory from your old computer, because using that would be the best way to access your old data.


Regards,
Tim.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: corruption

Ben Clark
Thank you Tim,
I upgraded, thought Ubuntu would have chosen latest.

GRAMPS: 3.4.2-1
Python: 2.7.3 (default, Aug  1 2012, 05:16:07) [...
BSDDB: 5.1.2 (5, 1, 25)
LANG: en_US.UTF-8
OS: Linux
Distribution: 3.2.0-37-generic-pae

I still get 362 people.
Even after I wrote a little script to pad extra zeros in the less than "%04d" ID's
True I no longer have the ~/.gramps directory from my old computer.

What I did is made a sorted list of all the ID's, and iterated through it. For each ID that was not in the "%04d" format I opened the gedcom file and replaced every instance with the next highest "%04d" formatted number.
 I now am back to 443 individuals :)
Thanks for all the help,
Ben


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free Next-Gen Firewall Hardware Offer
Buy your Sophos next-gen firewall before the end March 2013
and get the hardware for free! Learn more.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/sophos-d2d-feb
_______________________________________________
Gramps-bugs mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-bugs
Loading...