Bug 199739 - Collection entries are corrupted
Summary: Collection entries are corrupted
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 178973
Alias: None
Product: amarok
Classification: Applications
Component: general (show other bugs)
Version: 2.1.1
Platform: unspecified Linux
: NOR normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Amarok Developers
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2009-07-11 02:03 UTC by msched
Modified: 2009-07-11 13:57 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description msched 2009-07-11 02:03:10 UTC
Version:           2.1.1 (using KDE 4.2.4)
OS:                Linux

Two serious problems with Amarok 2 collection management:

1) Sometimes, some albums do not appear in the collection, even though they were shown after an earlier update or after adding an album. For example, for artist X only 3 out of 5 albums will be shown, while for most other artists everything is available.

2) Rescanning the collection (typically as an attempt to fix #1) sometimes corrupts entries.

Current example: The album "Pocahontas" by Alan Menken shows up as "Kill Bill Vol. 2" and with the corresponding cover. All tracks in this album are filed under this album and also displayed this way in the playlist. Likewise, the album "Façade Suites I & II, Viola Concerto, Variations on a Theme by Hindemith" by William Walton also shows up as "Kill Bill Vol. 2" with the same cover. Before the latest re-scan, both albums (the Menken and the Walton) showed up as "Façade Suites I & II, Viola Concerto, Variations on a Theme by Hindemith" with the "Kill Bill Vol. 2" cover, but would not open and display no tracks.

The tags in the actual files (FLAC files) are correct, but even adding the files by dragging them from Konqueror into the playlist will display the incorrect tags in Amarok.

I do not know how to fix the collection once it's been corrupted. Re-scans will usually do nothing to correct the broken albums. So far, my solution was to switch back to Amarok 1.4, and with the next update in the 2.x series, things worked fine for a while (a few days typically). However, due to various library updates, Ubuntu's inofficial Amarok 1.4 packages are getting buggier by the week, to the point where most scripts don't work and playback often skips parts of tracks. So now I'm stuck with Amarok 2.1.1 and a broken collection.
Comment 1 Hilikus 2009-07-11 02:51:38 UTC
i think this is a duplicate of
https://bugs.kde.org/199388
Comment 2 msched 2009-07-11 03:14:29 UTC
Seems to correspond to the second problem I described above, yes (but doesn't account for the completely missing entries I described in the first problem).
Comment 3 Myriam Schweingruber 2009-07-11 12:24:45 UTC
(In reply to comment #2)
> Seems to correspond to the second problem I described above, yes (but doesn't
> account for the completely missing entries I described in the first problem).

Well, you actually shouldn't submit two different items in a bug report. Marking this as a duplicate.

BTW; both problems are well known and there already are bug reports available for both of it. Please check the existing reports.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 199388 ***
Comment 4 msched 2009-07-11 13:30:14 UTC
It wasn't clear to me if these were two different problems, especially since #2 usually appears only after trying to get rid of #1. I did spend some time looking for similar bug reports, but couldn't find any (the fact that the already rather confusing bugs.kde.org wizard kept timing out didn't help).
Comment 5 Jeff Mitchell 2009-07-11 13:57:56 UTC
I believe this to be a duplicate of bug 178973. It should be fixed in current SVN, which I encourage you to try so that if it's not we don't release 2.2 with such an issue.

Please note that that bug deals with *database* corruption. There are still some issues with the collection browser showing things incorrectly. A good metric is, if things don't look right, and you close Amarok and restart it and things look right again, then it's not related to that bug.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 178973 ***