Joe Morris (NTM) wrote: > On 01/22/2008 06:34 AM, Jim Sabatke wrote: >> <snip> >> >> I just removed gimp through yast, downloaded the newest version, >> compiled and installed it. I now have EXIF available. >> >> Jim >> > Did you try Pascal's version from packman? It requires libexif, so I > would assume it was built with exif support. Just curious as to why you > built it, which must require many more devel packages to be installed > that otherwise did not need to be. He is a highly respected package > builder. > > When you say you have exif available, how do you know, or see. I am > curious and would like to check this one, but see nothing obvious. >
I loaded libexif through yast. I also loaded all the GTK related lib's through yast and try to keep them current. I did not try Pascal's version. I checked the files for gimp in yast before deleting it and they go into the same places that ./configure --prefix=/opt/gnome put them. Of course, I would rather have an RPM version. The exif data are available for the cameras listed at: http://ufraw.sourceforge.net/Cameras.html For me, the EXIF data show up on my photo website, which is where I noticed it was missing. I don't think I'm going to go back and re-edit the 100, or so, photos I've added before I noticed. You can also see the EXIF data in ufraw, but only in later versions. The 10.2 version is about 4 versions behind current and I don't believe it has EXIF support. I also hand compiled that one, which is no big deal as I believe it only produces one lib file. If you have ufraw available, then gimp will open raw files directly into ufraw and "OK" will take that file into gimp with EXIF data intact. It then writes it to jpeg files, but again only with the newer version if ufraw. Hope this all makes sense. Jim -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
