| Summary: | Dolphin search doesn't find .db files | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Applications] dolphin | Reporter: | wooden445 |
| Component: | search | Assignee: | Dolphin Bug Assignee <dolphin-bugs-null> |
| Status: | REPORTED --- | ||
| Severity: | normal | CC: | kfm-devel, nate, postix, tagwerk19 |
| Priority: | NOR | ||
| Version: | 23.04.0 | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Platform: | Kubuntu | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Latest Commit: | Version Fixed In: | ||
| Sentry Crash Report: | |||
|
Description
wooden445
2023-10-10 17:08:30 UTC
You have Baloo running?
I think if you look in the baloo configuration file:
~/.config/baloofilerc
you'll see "*.db" included in the "exclude filters" list.
My assumption up until now was that these excludes were to stop baloo trying to content index these extensions (which could get messy), not exclude them completely from indexing...
(In reply to tagwerk19 from comment #1) > You have Baloo running? > > I think if you look in the baloo configuration file: > ~/.config/baloofilerc > you'll see "*.db" included in the "exclude filters" list. > > My assumption up until now was that these excludes were to stop baloo trying > to content index these extensions (which could get messy), not exclude them > completely from indexing... Thanks, it seems removing the exception from baloofilerc does make .db searchable. I readded the exception and disabled file indexing, but .db remains unsearchable then too. For some reason changing these settings also got the .banana searches to work. Maybe the search screen could indicate that there are excluded search results, as well as an exception setting on the File Search settings page? Maybe what we should do is have Baloo still index files by name if they're in the exclusion list, just not by content? We definitely don't want to content-index .db files, but not finding them at all also feels wrong to me. (In reply to Nate Graham from comment #3) > Maybe what we should do is have Baloo still index files by name if they're > in the exclusion list, just not by content? We definitely don't want to > content-index .db files, but not finding them at all also feels wrong to me. Yes, that sounds like a big improvement! (In reply to wooden445 from comment #0) > With some testing I created another file with the file extension .banana > (test.banana). I don't find the file if I search for .banana in the same > folder, but I do find it if I run the search from its parent folder. find ./ > -type f -name "*.[extension]" finds both files. I thought I ought to try indexing a banana, not something I've tried before :-) test@neonunstable:~/Testdir$ echo "Hello Penguin" > testfile.banana test@neonunstable:~/Testdir$ kmimetypefinder testfile.banana text/plain test@neonunstable:~/Testdir$ balooshow6 -x testfile.banana 1417afed0da2dd 3977093853 1316783 testfile.banana [/home/test/Testdir/testfile.banana] Mtime: 1720439519 2024-07-08T13:51:59 Ctime: 1720439519 2024-07-08T13:51:59 Cached properties: Line Count: 1 Internal Info File Name Terms: Fbanana Ftestfile XAttr Terms: Plain Text Terms: hello penguin Property Terms: Mplain Mtext T5 T8 X20-1 lineCount: 1 test@neonunstable:~/Testdir$ baloosearch6 testfile.banana /home/test/Testdir/testfile.banana Elapsed: 0.873044 msecs The important bit is that it is "text/plain" other banana types may not be indexable... |