On 01/02/2012 03:14 PM, Dougie Nisbet wrote:
During some bulk tidying-up I found myself wanting to delete 2000+
images from Shotwell. I mean, really delete them. Just delete them.
Having selected them all and hit Shift-Del + Move to Wastebasket, I
found the process failing when it hit a file that was too long to
delete. e.g.
L 31611 2012-01-02 22:46:16 [MSG] MediaDataRepresentation.vala:105:
Unable to move original photo /images/2011/08/15/White-letter
Hairstreak Survey -- Hardwick Dene -- Pieris rapae (Pieridae) (Small
White or Small Cabbage White) -- tentative_ident -- (United Kingdom -
England - Bishopsgarth and Elm Tree Ward - Stockton-on-Tees) -- Mon 15
Aug 2011 11-21-15 BST.jpg to trash: Unable to create wastebasket info
file: File name too long
Two points.
1. When I get the error (I think it's something like "Unable to move
to Wastebasket, delete anyway?" - I select YES, and the entire process
stops. It's only by looking at the logfile I realise that the problem
is caused by the filename being too long. I think shotwell could
handle this a bit more gracefully - there's no reason to abort the
batch delete just because there's a problem with one file.
You're right: this is a bug. We've ticketed this at
http://redmine.yorba.org/issues/4555 .
2. Couldn't shotwell just delete it? Must it go to a wastebasket,
which I'm then going to locate and empty anyway? I grow weary of
programs trying to hold my hand and protect me from myself. I expect
it in Microsoft but one of my reasons for preferring Linux is the lack
of seatbelts. The ability to do things quickly and efficiently.
Perhaps it could be done as an option?
The essential problem here is that there are several possibilities and
it's tricky to design a nice user interface which offers the user any of
the following:
1. Move to the Shotwell trash.
2. Remove from the library, while leaving the file in place.
3. Remove from the library and move the file to the desktop trash.
4. Remove from the library and delete the file outright.
As a compromise, Shotwell currently lets the user perform operations 1-3
but not 4. If you have a concrete suggestion about how we could add
possibility 4 without cluttering the user interface, we could consider it.
I think a good solution to this problem could be to unify the Shotwell
and desktop trashes (http://redmine.yorba.org/issues/2645); that would
reduce the set of options we need to offer the user.
adam
_______________________________________________
Shotwell mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.yorba.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/shotwell
