On Sun, Oct 21, 2007 at 05:47:52PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > I looked at this some more. [...]
Thank you very much for this.
> [...] When the query on start fails, jack sets
> an internal variable to say that it should not tag files. There's
> a different variable that says whether files should be renamed and
> that's not changed. Your question is whether this behaviour makes
> sense. After looking at the code, I don't think it does. When we
> don't change that variable, nothing bad happens and the reason is
> simlpy: if a value jack absolutely needs is missing from th FreeDB
> file, it will print an error anyway and quit. So I don't think
> there's a reason that jack doesn't tag files when the query on start
> fails. After all, someone might have edited the file (as you did) and
> if the data is really missing, jack will notice anyway and quit.
Ok
> I should mention that I didn't write jack so I've no idea why jack is
> doing what it does. The developer of jack is busy so I cannot ask
> him. Based on my investigation, I think its safe to remove the code
> which sets the internal variable not to tag files. I tested this here
> and it works for me. I'd appreciate it if you could give it a go as
> well. I believes it resolves all problems.
If I understand your patch it totally removes the line with _set_id3tag.
I just did that and I get following error:
~$ jack -t 1
This is jack 3.1.1 (C)2004 Arne Zellentin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
*info* querying...
*warning* 202 No match for disc ID 3910d914. How about trying another
--server?
freedb search failed, continue? (y/N) y
Options: vbr read-ahead=99 id=3910d914 len=01:28 | press Q to quit
The final status was:
track_01: 3.40x [ ] [coding @8.68x done, 177kbit
Tagging.Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/bin/jack", line 277, in ?
jack_tag.tag(freedb_rename)
File "/var/lib/python-support/python2.4/jack_tag.py", line 172, in tag
oggi.add_tag('ALBUM', a_title.encode("utf-8"))
AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'encode'
> So I'm inclined to apply two patches. First, a patch to remove the
> code mentioned above (it's only a line). Second, a patch to ask
> people when query on start fails whether they want to edit the data.
Sounds reasonable to me, but shouldn't these patches go upstream as
well? (Or at least that's how I understand it works, especially for
something that is not a distro specific fix.)
Thanks again for your work and contact me if you need more info. I will
reply as fast as my job will allow :)
Regards,
Andrei
--
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
(Albert Einstein)
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
