Bug 214227 - digikam 0.10.0 not listing photos in chronological order
Summary: digikam 0.10.0 not listing photos in chronological order
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: digikam
Classification: Applications
Component: Albums-Filters (show other bugs)
Version: 0.10.0
Platform: Gentoo Packages Linux
: NOR normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Digikam Developers
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2009-11-12 06:07 UTC by rfc469
Modified: 2017-08-05 07:47 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In: 1.0.0


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description rfc469 2009-11-12 06:07:10 UTC
Version:            (using KDE 4.3.1)
Compiler:          gcc version 4.3.4 
OS:                Linux
Installed from:    Gentoo Packages

Like the title says, digikam 0.10.0 is not listing photos in the import window in chronological order (or even reverse chronological order).  Here's what I see:

p1000999.jpg
p1000998.jpg
...
p1000522.jpg
p1010949.jpg
p1010948.jpg
...
p1010002.jpg
p1010001.jpg

The most recent pictures are actually a bunch in the middle, 1010949-1010936.  It seems the name is somehow messing it up, but digikam 0.9.5 didn't have this problem.

Another issue is that all pictures have a yellow star on them, even though I've downloaded all the ones except 1010949-1010936 previously (with 0.10.0).
Comment 1 rfc469 2009-11-12 06:14:23 UTC
Sorry correction to the last part.  It does have a check mark next to the ones I downloaded previously with 0.10.0.  It doesn't have a check mark next to the ones I downloaded previously with 0.9.5.

When I downloaded with 0.10.0, I asked it to download all images and autoskip any already downloaded.  Apparently it didn't put a check mark by the ones that were autoskipped- I would expect it to do so.

I can create a separate bug report for the last part if you want...
Comment 2 caulier.gilles 2009-11-12 08:59:45 UTC
Please, take a look in 1.0.0-beta6 where a lots of improvements/fixes have been done, and try again...

Thanks in advance

Gilles Caulier
Comment 3 rfc469 2009-12-01 06:42:42 UTC
Upgraded to 1.0.0-beta6 and it's fixed.  Thanks!  It's nice there's the option to use chronological order as well.