On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 3:22 PM, Antony Mee <[email protected]> wrote:
> The sub-set of files that were corrupted corresponds, I think, to the files > that were edited in some way. Does (can) tagging alone cause the image > files > to be opened for write in 0.9.2? Or are there other features that can > result > in writing to image files in bulk? > > If you check Shotwell's Preferences, do you have "Write tags, titles, and other metadata to photo files" enabled? If so, then the files will be written to if you tag, rename, rotate, or change their exposure date/time (Photos -> Adjust Date/Time). We use the Exiv2 library for all metadata reading and writing. If you tag a lot of photos with this option on, Shotwell will update them in the background. Note that in order for Exiv2 to do this, it must essentially create a copy of the old file, delete the old file, then rename the new file to the old file's name. (It can't, in most cases, merely insert or overwrite the metadata into the old file.) This operation can be problematic for a lot of reasons, especially if your drive is full. If you can reproduce this easily, you might run Shotwell as Adam suggested earlier (with SHOTWELL_LOG=1) and send in the log file. I'd also run dmesg from the console and see what's in there; it might have some error messages that help identify the culprit. -- Jim _______________________________________________ Shotwell mailing list [email protected] http://lists.yorba.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/shotwell
