Created attachment 59909 [details]
Debug and reproduce instructions (pdf file)

Could you please give a short step-by-step in a comment? No need for a PDF file, just a few lines.

how to reproduce in short:
-) create a "amarok" system with amarok en mysql and mp3-s (on exported file system) 
-) let amarok build the collection
-) create a client with amarok and mount the mp3 fileystem on the same location
-) configure amarok to use the mp3 fileystem and mysql db from the "amarok" server [make sure it does not rebuild the collection!!!]
-) you will find on the client 0 tracks, the correct number of albums and the correct number of genres (within the "current track" tab)

full details in the attachment (pdf file)

Running in debug will give the following error (amarok on the client):

amarok: [MediaDeviceCache] Found Solid::DeviceInterface::StorageAccess with udi ="/org/kde/fstab/10.0.0.155:/mp3"
amarok: [MediaDeviceCache] Device name is = "10.0.0.155" and was made by "/mp3"
amarok: [MediaDeviceCache] Solid device is not accessible, will wait until it is to consider it added.

However the device (/mp3 -a mounted filesystem-) *IS* accessible (via filemanager and terminal)

Thank you for the feedback.

Is this still valid with Amarok 2.4.3 or 2.5 beta 1?

still valid in 2.4.3. Don't know about the beta, I'm sorry, but I do not use beta software.

Thank you for the prompt feedback.

I just upgraded to openSUSE 12.1 (amarok is now 2.4.3 on KDE 4.7.2) and now I have this problem even on my normal pc.
Setup:
-) mysql and mp3 tracks (/mp3) on server (schuurpc)
-) /mp3 mounted from server to client as /mp3 using nfs
-) amarok uses db on server

Amarok shows 0 tracks (should be large number); 1075 albums (probably correct) and 27 genres (probably correct)

Ran amarok -d : some tricky out there:

amarok:       [MediaDeviceCache] Found Solid::DeviceInterface::StorageAccess with udi =  "/org/kde/fstab/schuurpc:/mp3"
amarok:       [MediaDeviceCache] Device name is =  "schuurpc"  and was made by  "/mp3"
amarok:       [MediaDeviceCache] Solid device is not accessible, will wait until it is to consider it added.

/mp3 is mounted!!, fstab entryt for /mp3 is:

schuurpc:/mp3   /mp3    nfs     defaults 0 0 

NFS device plugin is enabled!!

Is this still valid with Amarok 2.5?

Yes it does, however this bug/feature is now open for about a year. In this year I did not get any in depth feedback about this bug/feature. My strong impression is that this is not high on the list of the developers. I'm now working with a shared mp3 disk and separate databases. Far from optimal but it does the job (somehow).

If you still think that somebody with knowledge will look it to this in the near future then keep this bug/feature open, otherwise you can close it.

Thank you for your support and keep on the good work. I'm just disappointed that I did not get any "in depth" feedback. A response like "yes it's a bug but very low on our priority list" would have met my expectations. Than at least I know that I didn't do anything wrong.

Cheers,
Arjan

Thank you for the feedback. The problem is not so much the priority but the available resources. All our developers have a daytime job and simply don't have enough time to fix all bugs.

Hi,
sharing a single mysql database between multiple hosts is not supported. What is *somehow* supported is sharing a database between multiple users on a single host.

The reason this is not supported is Amarok's "Dynamic collection" feature which tracks mounts using some kind of a unique indentifiers. These identifiers are different on different machines, you may have a look at the devices table in database.

What you can do is turning off the Dynamic Collection feature: 
http://amarok.kde.org/wiki/Dynamic_Collection [while the page is outdated, the recipe there should still work] on all hosts, followed by Full Rescan. Beware that it will only move you from "doesn't work" to "somehow supported" at best.

 * somehow supported = it kinda works, but you're on your own: our user suppor team probably won't help you and we'll likely only accept bug reports with a patch attached. (or rather, we'll head you to reviewboard.kde.org instead of filling bugs at all)

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ANSWER!!

As you might have seen, it took over a year to provide me with an answer. If I like the answer is a complete other case :)

Again thank you for taking the time to explain what is going on!

If I understood it correctly; due to the Dynamic Collection, Amarok will work as expected as long as a user "always" stays on the SAME machine. Switching machines "kills" normal Amarok operations (as I explained in this bugreport).

I am a "little bit" disappointed about this behaviour. Back in the days of Windows 3.1 (and maybe even uptill Windows 7) everybody had his or her  own PERSONAL computer. The great thing about *NIX is that you can create an environment where you need computers instead of PERSONAL computers. Just grap a machine, login and it will behave as expected. All this thanks to NFS, automounter, NIS/LDAP (to name a few)

I do understand that many people love the Dynamic Collection feature of Amarok, but this forces users to stay always on their own PERSONAL computer, never switch!!. I don't think this is what Amarok developers are heading for (please remember my environment worked great in Amarok 2.4, see the attached pdf file to this bugreport for proof).

Could you please point me to the procedure/web-form on how to issue an enhancement request to Amarok (I googled but didn't find any pointers).
I think that any disk mounted (static) via /etc/fstab should be treated in such a way that switching from one machine to another will not break normal operation of Amarok (e.g. the content of this bugreport).

(In reply to comment #13)
> THANK YOU FOR YOUR ANSWER!!
> 
> As you might have seen, it took over a year to provide me with an answer. If
> I like the answer is a complete other case :)

We are volunteers, you are not our customer or employer. Being impolite only discourages us from answering.

> If I understood it correctly; due to the Dynamic Collection, Amarok will
> work as expected as long as a user "always" stays on the SAME machine.
> Switching machines "kills" normal Amarok operations (as I explained in this
> bugreport).
> 
> I am a "little bit" disappointed about this behaviour. Back in the days of
> Windows 3.1 (and maybe even uptill Windows 7) everybody had his or her  own
> PERSONAL computer. The great thing about *NIX is that you can create an
> environment where you need computers instead of PERSONAL computers. Just
> grap a machine, login and it will behave as expected. All this thanks to
> NFS, automounter, NIS/LDAP (to name a few)
> 
> I do understand that many people love the Dynamic Collection feature of
> Amarok, but this forces users to stay always on their own PERSONAL computer,
> never switch!!. I don't think this is what Amarok developers are heading for
> (please remember my environment worked great in Amarok 2.4, see the attached
> pdf file to this bugreport for proof).

You have been told how to disable Dynamic Collection and what implications it would have. Nothing more needs to be done on our side. (did you actually read my answer

Also note that attaching pdfs on Amarok bug reports is completely inappropriate, being impolite only makes it worse.

> Could you please point me to the procedure/web-form on how to issue an
> enhancement request to Amarok (I googled but didn't find any pointers).
> I think that any disk mounted (static) via /etc/fstab should be treated in
> such a way that switching from one machine to another will not break normal
> operation of Amarok (e.g. the content of this bugreport).

Don't bother, it would be rejected.

(In reply to comment #14)
> (In reply to comment #13)
> > THANK YOU FOR YOUR ANSWER!!
> > 
> > As you might have seen, it took over a year to provide me with an answer. If
> > I like the answer is a complete other case :)
> 
> We are volunteers, you are not our customer or employer. Being impolite only
> discourages us from answering.
I never intended to be impolite.

> 
> > If I understood it correctly; due to the Dynamic Collection, Amarok will
> > work as expected as long as a user "always" stays on the SAME machine.
> > Switching machines "kills" normal Amarok operations (as I explained in this
> > bugreport).
> > 
> > I am a "little bit" disappointed about this behaviour. Back in the days of
> > Windows 3.1 (and maybe even uptill Windows 7) everybody had his or her  own
> > PERSONAL computer. The great thing about *NIX is that you can create an
> > environment where you need computers instead of PERSONAL computers. Just
> > grap a machine, login and it will behave as expected. All this thanks to
> > NFS, automounter, NIS/LDAP (to name a few)
> > 
> > I do understand that many people love the Dynamic Collection feature of
> > Amarok, but this forces users to stay always on their own PERSONAL computer,
> > never switch!!. I don't think this is what Amarok developers are heading for
> > (please remember my environment worked great in Amarok 2.4, see the attached
> > pdf file to this bugreport for proof).
> 
> You have been told how to disable Dynamic Collection and what implications
> it would have. Nothing more needs to be done on our side. (did you actually
> read my answer
Yes I did read your answer.  But you also explained that the given solution is "somehow supported" including what that actually means.
Being a user (and in no way a programmer) I do understand that I should NOT be in the "somehow supported" corner of life.

> 
> Also note that attaching pdfs on Amarok bug reports is completely
> inappropriate, being impolite only makes it worse.
> 
Again, being impolite was NOT my intention. 
With respect to the attachment. I added the attachments to enable developers to understand what was going on. They were ment to help! 
There was no indication that it was inappropriate to attache a pdf. If this is impolite please make such a remark on the form.


> > Could you please point me to the procedure/web-form on how to issue an
> > enhancement request to Amarok (I googled but didn't find any pointers).
> > I think that any disk mounted (static) via /etc/fstab should be treated in
> > such a way that switching from one machine to another will not break normal
> > operation of Amarok (e.g. the content of this bugreport).
> 
> Don't bother, it would be rejected.

I won't bother .. you just pissed of a user who was just trying to help to improve Amarok but that doesn't seem to be appreciated.

(In reply to comment #15)
> > You have been told how to disable Dynamic Collection and what implications
> > it would have. Nothing more needs to be done on our side. (did you actually
> > read my answer
> 
> Yes I did read your answer.  But you also explained that the given solution
> is "somehow supported" including what that actually means.
> Being a user (and in no way a programmer) I do understand that I should NOT
> be in the "somehow supported" corner of life.

That's the best what we can do. We have a finite set of supported configurations (because we have a rather limited manpower), sharing a single collection database across multiple boxes with Dynamic Collection enabled isn't among them. Other unsupported configuration is for example running Amarok on your digital watch.

> > > Could you please point me to the procedure/web-form on how to issue an
> > > enhancement request to Amarok (I googled but didn't find any pointers).
> > > I think that any disk mounted (static) via /etc/fstab should be treated in
> > > such a way that switching from one machine to another will not break normal
> > > operation of Amarok (e.g. the content of this bugreport).
> > 
> > Don't bother, it would be rejected.
> 
> I won't bother .. you just pissed of a user who was just trying to help to
> improve Amarok but that doesn't seem to be appreciated.

Some feature requests are out of our scope (including this one) with our current manpower and we try to be frank by rejecting them early, even if it may seem gross. Sorry about it.

Patches or funding welcome! ;)