These are some observations I have made running Aspect on Linux. I hope they are useful to someone. I realize that Linux support is still experimental but I have moved to Linux full time and no longer use Windows. So, I hope you keep up the Linux experiments.
Aspect
Version 1.0.0-preview-.39.1
Operating System: MX Linux 23.3
KDE Plasma Version: 5.27.5
KDE Frameworks Version: 5.103.0
Qt Version: 5.15.8
Kernel Version: 6.1.0-17-amd64 (64-bit)
Graphics Platform: X11
Processors: 16 × 11th Gen Intel® Core™ i7-11700K @ 3.60GHz
Memory: 31.1 GiB of RAM
Graphics Processor: Mesa Intel® Graphics
Manufacturer: Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd.
Product Name: Z590 AORUS PRO AX
System Version: -CF
after launching Aspect it freezes for 5 to 6 minutes while “syncronizing file system…” runs.
scrolling with mouse wheel is very slow. Logitech M720 bluetooth or Microsoft usb wired mouse.
File\Settings window opens blank, intermittently.
Edit\Select All does not work. The Ctrl+A keyboard shortcut works. Selecting with the mouse, mouse+Ctrl, and mouse+Shift all work.
Edit\Deselect All does not work.
Edit\Invert Selection does not work.
Image\Open With does not work.
Image\Show in file manager works, but when the file manager opens the original selected photo is not highlighted.
Image\Rotate both work. 1 is the image rotation lossless? 2 is a backup created? 3 is there an undo\redo function?
Thank you for assembling this list! I’ve looked into each of the items and apart from the blank settings dialog, I think all of them will - or are likely to - be covered by the imminent release.
This might be fixed with preview 40, there has been a significant improvement in the “scanning” phase.
This has been fixed in preview 40 (also affecting macOS).
This was supposed to be fixed with preview 39, but part of the fix didn’t make it into the release and on Linux, I’m still getting the issues even with the full fix applied. I’ll have to look into this some more.
This was a regression in preview 39 and will also be fixed again in preview 40.
We are currently using the xdg-open utility to open the file manager and unfortunately there is no way to pass a set of files to select there. Instead we’d have to look into other means that might or might not be specific to the particular file manager that is installed.
The 90° based rotation currently simply updates the rotation flag of the image (using an XMP sidecar file). You can persist the change for JPEGs using the Image → Write metadata into file menu entry, but in no case will the actual image data be affected.
I have update the previous notes I made regarding Aspect on MX Linux. I hope these help.
after launching Aspect it freezes for 5 to 6 minutes while “synchronizing file system…” runs. Preview.40 - not fixed.
scrolling with mouse wheel is very slow. Logitech M720 bluetooth or Microsoft usb wired mouse. Preview.40 - improved speed, fixed.
File\Settings window opens blank, intermittently. Preview.40 - not fixed.
Edit\Select All does not work. The Ctrl+A keyboard shortcut works. Selecting with the mouse, mouse+Ctrl, and mouse+Shift all work. Preview.40 - fixed.
Edit\Deselect All does not work. Preview.40 - fixed.
Edit\Invert Selection does not work. Preview.40 - fixed.
Image\Open With does not work. Preview.40 - not fixed.
Image\Show in file manager works, but when the file manager opens the original selected photo is not highlighted. Preview.40 - answered.
Image\Rotate both work. 1 is the image rotation lossless? 2 is a backup created? 3 is there an undo\redo function? Preview.40 - answered.
Help\Support does not work. Preview.40 - fixed.
Help\Report bug does not work. Preview.40 - fixed, opens community forum.
Help\Show introduction works. Preview.40 - fixed.
Help\About works. Preview.40 - fixed.
Library\Find duplicate photos works. Preview.40 - Question, can this feature be made to target individual folders\events individually? Question, could a side by side image comparison popup be created?
If you can, could you send me a $TEMP/aspect-log.sdl file (compressed) right after the synchronization activity has finished? Hopefully that should give a clue where the time is being spent. Are there by any chance also any automatic or resumed imports active at startup?
This is something that I’ve still observed on my Linux laptop as well, there is an open issue (#1426) for this and I’ll revisit this when I get the chance.
I tried “Edit a copy” with Gimp and that at least is working fine for me. Do you have an example/program action that doesn’t work? Also, does it crash, display an error or just doing nothing?
To clarify, this would mean that you’d select an event or folder and ignore any files outside of that while looking for duplicates? That should generally pretty easy to implement, but it would be interesting to understand the concrete use case here.
The side-by-side comparison could be added, but would currently be pointless, because, all duplicates are always exact binary copies of each other, so there would never be any visible differences. However, the duplicate detection might be extended in the future to also find duplicates that are not identical, but still depict the same contents - once that’s the case, that would definitely make sense, though (as well as displaying some additional metrics, such as resolution and the lossless/lossy nature of the copy).
Thanks for your reply. I have sent you the log file as you requested through email.
The settings window opening to a black seems to happen the second time I open it during a session. I noticed this characteristic by chance and have only repeated it 2 or 3 times.
I installed Gimp and the “Edit a copy” works after I set it up. I had trouble getting it to work with other software but I may have been pointing to the wrong file as a launcher the other programs.
The use case regarding limiting duplicate searching is that I am nervous about deleting duplicates en mass because I had a bad experience doing that once. It has made me want to be very careful when finding and deleting duplicate files. So I guess the use case is really to make me feel less anxiety:-).
I’ve taken a look and it looks like it’s in fact just he regular file system scan that takes place. Is the drive in question directly connected to the computer (SATA/USB2/USB3?) or accessed via network? Is it a magnetic disc, or an SSD? I could try to reproduce the setup here to find out where exactly the majority of the time is spent.
If you have a particular application that is interesting to get working, I can also try to set that up on my system (and possibly also add it to the list of auto-detected applications for future releases).
I can absolutely feel that . In fact, this is why the actual deletion code works in a rather paranoid way, ensuring for each duplicate that it still exists and the contents still amount to the same SHA-512/224 hash value before considering to actually delete a file. When attempting to delete a duplicate and the other duplicate is missing physically (i.e. it’s a left-over entry in the library catalog), instead of deleting the requested one, it will also move it to the location where that missing duplicate is expected, ensuring that the last physical copy can never be deleted.
But even if the deletion logic is perfect, in a such a complex overall system there will always be a non-zero chance for something to go wrong unexpectedly. So I’d agree that it makes sense to allow limiting the scope to minimize the mental burden and possible impact when desired. I’ve opened a ticket internally (#1430), so that we can discuss this further.
The drive that Aspect is installed on is a 1TB NVME drive which contains only operating systems and installed programs. The photos and the Aspect Library are stored on a separate 4TB NVME drive that is for data only. The system has 2 other NVME drives, 2 SSD drives and a standard spinning hard drive.
A few of the programs on linux. Photoflare, A Photo Tool (Libre), and Xnview MP.
Thanks for considering the duplicate removal feature request.
. In fact, this is why the actual deletion code works in a rather paranoid way, ensuring for each duplicate that it still exists and the contents still amount to the same SHA-512/224 hash value before considering to actually delete a file. When attempting to delete a duplicate and the other duplicate is missing physically (i.e. it’s a left-over entry in the library catalog), instead of deleting the requested one, it will also move it to the location where that missing duplicate is expected, ensuring that the last physical copy can never be deleted.