[Digikam-users] Problem with new hard disk containing existing images

[sleepless]

I have had my own fights with it, but finaly know how to handle it. I 
think the usage of the UUID is usefull for safety, not to mess up 
different db´s and probably for other reasons I don´t know about. If you 
think it is wrong and want to have it changed, I advise to make a bug 
report, that gives the best change for programmers attention.

If you sofar not have it the way you intended, I might be able and 
always willing to help, I dealt with it several times before.

Best regards
Rinus

Op 09-10-11 21:19, Stuart T Rogers schreef:
> Well I un-mounted the original copy and then started Digikam. I then 
> got messages for each collection saying that it was not on the disk 
> with the correct UUID but had found it elsewhere, despite the fact 
> that they were mounted at the same mount point!!!
>
> To my mind to use a UUID in the database to find one's collection is 
> just daft. Noone but computers use UUIDs, it should simply use the 
> original path and if it cannot find the photos then open a dialog for 
> the user to select the correct path.
>
> I simply do not understand why on earth the UUID is used to identify 
> collections, it makes it very awkward to replace a hard drive with the 
> photos on for a larger one.
>
> Please change the way Digikam works so that it uses the actual path 
> and not the UUID.
>
> Stuart
>
> On 09/10/11 18:26, sleepless wrote:
>> Op 09-10-11 19:10, Stuart T Rogers schreef:
>>> Rinus I do see in some ways what you are saying but quite honestly
>>> since the disk is mounted at the same mount point within my user space
>>> as the old one I expected Digikam to just read the new one, find the
>>> database and the read the collections but it has actually read the new
>>> copy of the database and then updated all the collections to point to
>>> the old hard disk mount point which I do not believe should be correct
>>> operation.
>>>
>>> So now I have the new copy of the database pointing to all the old
>>> copies of the photographs.
>>>
>>> I expected it to read whatever the hard disk is mounted at that
>>> original mount point and get on with it, not to do what it has done
>>> and effectively corrupt the database with wrong pointers. It really
>>> should not care which hard disk is mounted but simply read the one
>>> which is.
>>>
>>> This makes it very difficult to upgrade a hard disk to a larger one
>>> and makes far more work then should be necessary.
>>>
>>> Stuart
>>>
>>> On 09/10/11 17:50, sleepless wrote:
>>>> Hi Stuart T,
>>>> If your new harddisk has the same name as the old one (let´s say
>>>> ¨photo¨, one is mounted as ¨photo¨ and the other as ¨photo_¨, you can
>>>> see that in /media if that is your mountpoint. So maybe digikam did 
>>>> the
>>>> right thing, it depends on which one is mounted first. If only the new
>>>> drive has been mounted, digikam starts saying that it found the
>>>> collection but that the disk id has changed, and it can and will read
>>>> your new drive.
>>>> regards,
>>>> Rinus
>>>>
>>>> Op 09-10-11 18:09, Stuart T Rogers schreef:
>>>>> I am currently using Digikam 1.9 and today I installed a new hard 
>>>>> disk
>>>>> for all my photos. I copied everything over outside of Digikam and
>>>>> then remounted the new hard disk in the same place as the old one was
>>>>> which contained the collections. The database was copied to the new
>>>>> hard disk as well.
>>
>> Maybe just a weird and useless idea but if I understood correctly dk has
>> changed the new copy of your db, hence it should be possible to start
>> all over again with the old db...
>> Rinus
>>>>> Just for the time being I also mounted the old hard
>>>>> disk at a new mount point so I could copy over anything I'd 
>>>>> forgotten.
>>>>>
>>>>> On starting Digikam it promptly used the old hard disk at the new
>>>>> mount point without being told. I dont understand why since the new
>>>>> disk is mounted where the old one was. I use a complete hard disk for
>>>>> photos by the way which is an ntfs partition as it is shared with a
>>>>> dual boot XP install.
>>>>>
>>>>> Surely Digikam should have gone to the new hard disk in the original
>>>>> mount point!
>>>>>
>>>>> Stuart
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Digikam-users mailing list
>>>> Digikam-users at kde.org
>>>> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Digikam-users mailing list
>> Digikam-users at kde.org
>> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users
>>
>