Am Montag, 14. Juli 2014, 21:58:42 schrieb Ulrich Pegelow: > Hi Francisco, > > there is something really fishy with that xmp file. It claims to have > the watermark module version 2 enabled. However, the parameter field is > empty (<rfd:li/>). > > Here is the relevant sequence: > > <darktable:history_modversion> > <rdf:Seq> > <rdf:li>2</rdf:li> > </rdf:Seq> > </darktable:history_modversion> > <darktable:history_enabled> > <rdf:Seq> > <rdf:li>1</rdf:li> > </rdf:Seq> > </darktable:history_enabled> > <darktable:history_operation> > <rdf:Seq> > <rdf:li>watermark</rdf:li> > </rdf:Seq> > </darktable:history_operation> > <darktable:history_params> > <rdf:Seq> > <rdf:li/> > </rdf:Seq> > </darktable:history_params> > > > Something like that should normally not have been generated by > darktable. Do you remember which version produced it? > > In my case darktable does not crash though. It just ignores the > incomplete watermark module.
Just for the record, a related request at the exiv2 forum is [0] – and I never got a real answer. That one doesn't explain why there is an empty history blob in the XMP, but it explains why we get random effects from such a case. > Ulrich Tobias [...] [0] http://dev.exiv2.org/boards/3/topics/1729
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Want fast and easy access to all the code in your enterprise? Index and search up to 200,000 lines of code with a free copy of Black Duck Code Sight - the same software that powers the world's largest code search on Ohloh, the Black Duck Open Hub! Try it now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bds
_______________________________________________ Darktable-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-users
