*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 887357 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/887357
This is a duplicate of bug 887357. The bug has been fixed for the
upcoming release of Shotwell (0.12).
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 887357
send to... broken
--
You received this bug
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 894553 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/894553
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 894553
Writing metadata to files... never finishes
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs, which is
** Changed in: shotwell (Ubuntu)
Status: New = Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to shotwell in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/958784
Title:
downloaded pictures detected as duplicates
To manage
This has been fixed upstream: Shotwell will now search only the DCIM
directory if it is present. The fix is present in 0.11.93 and will be
in the upcoming 0.12 release.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to shotwell in
Maui: Debian testing will often not have the latest packages. Even
Debian experimental will sometimes have older packages than the
alpha/beta releases of commercially supported distributions such as
Ubuntu and Fedora. Debian is an awesome community project, but because
the commercially supported
Great. I downloaded the tar.gz and extracted it onto an SD card. For
me, Shotwell shows the card as a Mass Storage Camera and correctly
displays the RW2 and JPEG images (see attached screenshot). I'm able to
import them just fine. I'm using Ubuntu 12.04, Shotwell from git
master, libraw
** Attachment added: import.png
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/shotwell/+bug/853373/+attachment/2824653/+files/import.png
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to shotwell in Ubuntu.
What happens if you run Shotwell again? Does the crash occur every time
you try to start it?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to shotwell in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/947561
Title:
shotwell crashed with
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 941464 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/941464
This is a duplicate of bug 941464, and is known upstream at
http://redmine.yorba.org/issues/4775 . The bug has been fixed in trunk.
The fix will be in Shotwell 0.11.93, coming this week.
** This bug has
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 941464 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/941464
OK - maybe this is not an exact duplicate of bug 941464 (which describes
flickering while importing). The underlying cause is the same, however.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a
Romano: thanks for your observations, but we prefer that a bug ticket
such as this one be focused on only one issue (RW2 support in this
case). If you want to report a number of small problems, you could send
a message to the Shotwell mailing list. Or you could file tickets for
those problems
Maui: thanks for letting us know that you're still not seeing RW2 files
in Shotwell. It's difficult for us to test this since we don't have a
camera that shoots RW2 here at Yorba, but we'll see what we can do.
Most GNOME programs (such as Nautilus or gedit or Totem) require the
latest versions
Romano: yes, an SD image like that would be extremely helpful if it lets
us reproduce this problem here at Yorba. If you can share an image with
us via UbuntuOne (or post a download link) then we can take a look.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop
Actually, we would like to evolve Shotwell so that all metadata edits
and changes are always stored in files, not only in the database.
There are several ways this can happen:
- we can write metadata changes to the original photo file (which is what
happens when this checkbox is checked today)
-
This is a known bug: Shotwell does not correctly handle dates before
1969. If you try to give photos dates earlier than that, you may get
unpredictable results including incorrect sorting. See
http://redmine.yorba.org/issues/3040
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member
This flickering was caused by a recent GTK update, and has been fixed in
trunk: see http://redmine.yorba.org/issues/4775 . We're planning to
issue a new release 0.11.93 next week including the fix.
** Changed in: shotwell (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed = Fix Committed
--
You received this
This bug is known and has been fixed in trunk. See
http://redmine.yorba.org/issues/4775
We'll be releasing Shotwell 0.11.93 including the bug fix early next
week.
** Changed in: shotwell (Ubuntu)
Status: New = Fix Committed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a
Romano,
the gphoto bug has been fixed in the latest libgphoto, version 2.4.12.
That version is not yet available in Ubuntu Precise, but should appear
there soon. We're still not completely sure whether that will solve the
RW2 problem in Shotwell, however; see
http://redmine.yorba.org/issues/3428
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 887357 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/887357
This is a duplicate of #887357, reported upstream at
http://redmine.yorba.org/issues/4432. It has been fixed in Shotwell
0.11.92 (currently available in Ubuntu Precise).
** This bug has been marked a
This is filed as a Shotwell bug, but has nothing to do with Shotwell.
So I'm marking this as invalid - please reopen or refile this under a
different Ubuntu component.
** Changed in: shotwell (Ubuntu)
Status: New = Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
This looks like bug http://redmine.yorba.org/issues/4201 upstream. As
described in comments #5 and #7 on that ticket, the rename operation can
lead to a crash or other unpredictable behavior. The bug has been fixed
for the next release of Shotwell, version 0.12. The fix is also present
in the
I see this too. I've ticketed this upstream at
http://redmine.yorba.org/issues/4715 . We'll look into this right away.
** Changed in: shotwell (Ubuntu)
Status: New = Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to
Thanks for the bug report. This bug is known upstream:
http://redmine.yorba.org/issues/4262
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to shotwell in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/923325
Title:
Setting Developer to
This seems worth investigating. I've ticketed this upstream:
http://redmine.yorba.org/issues/4649
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to shotwell in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/916441
Title:
Actually I think this is just a specific instance of a more general
problem, which is that dragging and dropping from Shotwell works only to
Nautilus, not to other applications. This is
http://redmine.yorba.org/issues/1563 . (See also bug #821915 , which is
another instance of this.)
** Changed
I was mistaken: the libraw shared library is available in an Ubuntu
package today ('libraw2'). We should build Shotwell to use this shared
library and depend on this package. I've ticketed that as #890372.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs,
...and we also need libraw itself to link to lcms2 rather than lcms1.
I've ticketed that as bug #890379.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to gimp in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/885324
Title:
Completely
For Shotwell, this is ticketed upstream at
http://redmine.yorba.org/issues/421 .
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to gvfs in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/882825
Title:
Does not save the configuration file
Till: Yes, there really is a libraw. :) You're not seeing it because
on Ubuntu Shotwell is built using libraw as a static library, so libraw
is compiled into the Shotwell executable. It would be nice to use a
shared library instead, but we can't do that at the moment because
libraw.so currently
Shotwell itself does not use lcms; it uses libraw, which depends on
lcms1 in Ubuntu. Note that libraw 0.13.8 (present in Oneiric) can build
using either lcms1 or lcms2. So to solve this particular dependency I
suspect that you only need to update your libraw packaging to build
using lcms2. You
** Attachment added: screenshot
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/807627/+attachment/2197696/+files/screenshot
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to epiphany-browser in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/807627
Title:
Public bug reported:
I'm running Epiphany 3.0.3 on Ubuntu 11.10 (Oneiric) using the default
theme.
Normally, the URL in the URL bar appears black on a light gray background and
is easy to read. While a page is loading, however, the URL is in white text on
a light gray background and is
I'm seeing this too (on Fedora 15, actually). I've filed a bug upstream
here:
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=648224
** Bug watch added: GNOME Bug Tracker #648224
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=648224
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
I'm also sorely missing a system monitor applet for Unity. An indicator
applet might be OK. As another approach, perhaps System Monitor could
show a graph indicating CPU activity inside its icon in the Unity
Launcher. (That's how it works on a Mac, by the way.)
--
You received this bug
mannheim,
that's a good point. I've updated the upstream ticket
(http://trac.yorba.org/ticket/2581) to be called optionally rotate JPEG
pixels, and I agree it would be good to offer this as an option. We
could offer to rotate at export time and/or when importing.
--
You received this bug
I'll point out that it was never the Shotwell team's intention to
develop a program that would replace Eye of GNOME. For the record,
here's an excerpt from some thoughts on the subject that I sent to Rick
Spencer and Robert Ancell a couple of months ago:
Shotwell was primarily designed to be a
201 - 236 of 236 matches
Mail list logo
