I have a number of files that are name in the unix time format from an older camera, however the date and time tool to change the metadata date (currently not existing) does not work and says "not valid" perhaps a tick box or selector (for the user to tick / select) should be added if unix time is what is what named the file, in wish case digikam will be able to convert this to normal time format and apply as the date in the metadata.
Can you list the file names with the Unix time from your computer ?
Created attachment 176477 [details] attachment-1824572-0.html For example 1435225825065 On Tue, 10 Dec 2024, 4:20 pm , <bugzilla_noreply@kde.org> wrote: > https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=497257 > > --- Comment #1 from caulier.gilles@gmail.com --- > Can you list the file names with the Unix time from your computer ? > > -- > You are receiving this mail because: > You are on the CC list for the bug. > You reported the bug.
Sorry, this is an absolute special case that makes no sense to implement. If you assume any number as Unix Time, the error rate would be far too high. You could restrict it to numbers of a certain length, but I probably wouldn't implement it anyway. Maik
Created attachment 176483 [details] attachment-1856472-0.html Yes it would up the error rate loads that's why I said if it were to be implemented there should be a tick box to detect / let digikam know its Unix, so it does not otherwise detect Unix. On Tue, 10 Dec 2024, 7:52 pm Maik Qualmann, <bugzilla_noreply@kde.org> wrote: > https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=497257 > > Maik Qualmann <metzpinguin@gmail.com> changed: > > What |Removed |Added > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > CC| |metzpinguin@gmail.com > > --- Comment #3 from Maik Qualmann <metzpinguin@gmail.com> --- > Sorry, this is an absolute special case that makes no sense to implement. > If > you assume any number as Unix Time, the error rate would be far too high. > You could restrict it to numbers of a certain length, but I probably > wouldn't > implement it anyway. > > Maik > > -- > You are receiving this mail because: > You reported the bug. > You are on the CC list for the bug.
Following Maik comment 3