Jrnl: Cannot access jrnl files. No recommended backend was available

[dastagg]

Running on ArchLinux.
The default jrnl file is encrypted.
What are the keyring backends it is looking for?

~ ❯❯❯ jrnl --edit ⏎
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/bin/jrnl", line 9, in
load_entry_point('jrnl==1.9.8', 'console_scripts', 'jrnl')()
File "/usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/jrnl/cli.py", line 194, in run
journal = Journal.Journal(journal_name, config)
File "/usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/jrnl/Journal.py", line 39, in **init
self.open()
File "/usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/jrnl/Journal.py", line 105, in open
journal = util.get_password(keychain=self.name, validator=validate_password)
File "/usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/jrnl/util.py", line 37, in get_password
pwd_from_keychain = keychain and get_keychain(keychain)
File "/usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/jrnl/util.py", line 56, in get_keychain
return keyring.get_password('jrnl', journal_name)
File "/usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/keyring/core.py", line 42, in get_password
return _keyring_backend.get_password(service_name, username)
File "/usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/keyring/backends/fail.py", line 18, in get_password
raise RuntimeError("No recommended backend was available")
RuntimeError: No recommended backend was available
~

[roman-holovin]

Same, this happened after updating python-keyring to the latest version.

@dastagg, you can "fix" it via rollbacking python-keyring - sudo pacman -U /var/cache/pacman/pkg/python-keyring-7.3-1-any.pkg.tar.xz

[dastagg]

Thanks! That worked, but I'm not going to close this issue. Not sure why it doesn't work with python-keyring 8.2-1 so I'll leave this open and check the next time jrnl updates.

[maebert]

Thanks, I locked the version to 7.3 while figuring out how what's going on in 8.2.

[dastagg]

Just to follow-up:

Just upgraded python-keyring to 8.4.1-1 and python-keyrings-alt 1.1.2016123-1 and jrnl is working fine.

[hoptimumthreat]

This did the trick for me.

apt-get install python-keyring

[lock[bot]]

This thread has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.