On dimanche 5 février 2017 12:06:29 CET Francesco Scaglioni wrote:
> HI,
> 
> On 05/02/17 10:41, Remco Viëtor wrote:
> > On dimanche 5 février 2017 09:56:26 CET Francesco Scaglioni wrote:
> >> Hi
> >> 
> >> On 04/02/17 16:59, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> >>> * Francesco Scaglioni <[email protected]> [02-04-17 11:50]:
> >>> 
> >>> Explain more to me the problem with dt not preserving the directory
> >>> structure.  And I do not know if dt's moves are recursive, you may need
> >>> to
> >>> move each individual directory.
> >> 
> >> I can create the new folder structure locally that is not a problem.
> >> 
> >> The existing structure is :
> >> 
> >> home//me/Photos/year/month/projects( maybe up to 4 or 5 )/? sub-projects
> >> 
> >> If I ask DT to import recursively eg 2013 it will load the images from
> >> all sub-folders.  If I then ask DT to copy or move them to a new 2013
> >> destination it will do so but the folder structure below the original
> >> 2013 is not recreated in the new target folder and all images end up
> >> getting placed in the new 2013 folder root.
> > 
> > Does darktable have a problem with symbolic links? If not, why not have:
> > "/home/me/Photos/2017/..." for current year as direct storage on SSD
> > "/home/me/Photos/2016" as a symbolic link to "/home/me/media/photos/2016"
> > ?
> > And the same for 2003--2015, so 14 folders to move, 14 symlinks to create;
> > sounds like a job for a bash script. Note that the number of folders under
> > the year is not important here.
> > 
> > At the end of the year:
> > *close DarkTable*
> > move /home/me/Photos/2017/... to /home/me/media/photos/
> > create a new directory for 2018
> > create a symlink for 2017
> > 
> > This way, you keep the original folder structure.
> > Indeed, changing the folder structure is going to cause a lot of work, but
> > as long as it's repetitive, scripting should be possible, as it's
> > basically changing a *part* of the pathname in a known and constant way.
> 
> I had thought about symlinks ( I assume that they can be created
> recursively ) - my worry was that if I then decide to delete old photos
> then the symlink would be deleted and not the image.  If I edit and old
> photo and export a sidecar file would the sidecar file end up in the
> same folder as the image ?

If you'd have to create symlinks recursively down to the level of individual 
photos, there would be NO interest in using them... 

Sorry, but I guess you'll have to read up on what symbolic links are and do. 
Too much to explain here.

Remco.

____________________________________________________________________________
darktable user mailing list
to unsubscribe send a mail to [email protected]

Reply via email to