https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=521140
--- Comment #4 from goo <[email protected]> --- yes, it seems to be the hidden files in those snap folders that are the main issue for the baloo crawl, and if you do not index hidden files then most of the churn is avoided. still, i would argue that even without hidden file indexing enabled there are still a lot of folders in ~/snap that are of no value to the user being indexed... user saved content would likely not need to be saved in ~/snap On Sun, Jun 7, 2026 at 12:25 AM <[email protected]> wrote: > https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=521140 > > --- Comment #3 from [email protected] --- > (In reply to goo from comment #2) > > find -not \( -path './snap/firefox/common' -prune \) -not \( -path > > './.cache' -prune \) -type f -mmin -1 -printf "%C+ %p\n" | sort -n | > tail > > -10 > So you are skipping the firefox config/cache... > > Interesting as I don't see Baloo indexing much here, Ah but this is without > indexing hidden files/folders. If I index hidden files/folders I see what > you > mean, I get a stream of files updated under ~/snap/firefox/common/.cache > and > ~/snap/firefox/common/.mozilla > > I think that Firefox would be going this anyway, if installed locally. > > The question is, is there anything under ~/snap that you would want > indexing to > find? People often turn on hidden files/folders in order to find config > files, > just like you are doing with your script... > > At the moment, I say to exclude ~/.mozilla and ~/.thunderbird, it might > make > sense to mention ~/snap/firefox/common and ~/snap/thunderbird/common > > ... And then there are flatpaks and ~/.var/app > > -- > You are receiving this mail because: > You reported the bug. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
