IPhoto 9.1.1 ('11) messed up soft links

I recently noticed that iPhoto is not following all of my aliases to find the original photos. I do not copy my photos to iPhoto, so when I import them, iPhoto creates an alias to the original file (which is on the same volume).
It turns out that iPhoto has a problem with a whole bunch of Unix style soft links that I created within the iPhoto directory structure when I moved my photos from an external drive to my boot volume. When I did this, I had written a shell script to search for the original on its new location and replace the stale OS X Alias (which pointed to the old volume) with a soft link to the new file. It seemed to work fine way back then (1/31/08).
At first, I thought that iPhoto was not following the soft links. However, when I examine the original files to which the soft links pointed, they have all been changed to Aliases!!!! It appears that the original photo data is still intact in each of the files, yet if you do a Get Info, it is an alias.
I've tested a couple of ideas on solutions:
a) cp -X of the original file to get rid of the extended attribute info. Still doesn't work. However, the new file (without the extended attributes) does open in Preview so that I can see the original jpg.
b) replacing a soft link with a Finder Alias to the 'cp -X' file. Still doesn't work.
What should I do now?
Thanks!
Henry Flurry

Hmm ... that doesn't ring true. iPhoto only has problems with the photos that were soft links. Here's what I imagine happened:
1) iPhoto recognizes that the original photo is a link
2) It then decides to update the extended attributes and, assuming that the file is an Alias instead of a Unix Soft Link, opens the file directly to update the extended attributes
3) Because the file is a soft link, the fopen (or whatever it uses) opens up the original file directly, and not the link
4) When the extended attributes are updated, they end up getting added to the original data file.
I'll admit that this is conjecture and I don't know why iPhoto would be updating the extended attributes. Does iPhoto store any data in this? Could this be something further I need to update?
I'd like to poke around a bit more. For iPhoto 11, what is the directory structure of the iPhoto library? Perhaps I'm making wrong assumptions on which files to change.
Thanks!
Henry
Message was edited by: Henry AZ to fix formatting

Similar Messages

Sharing album artwork with fast user switching and soft links

We have 4 users, 4 iPods, 4 sets of playlists. Each has their own account. All the music lives on an external drive and each iTunes is set to store its music in the same shared folder. That all works fine.
Now we're getting into album artwork, and I want to share that too. I found a posting somewhere that suggested a soft link from /Users/Me/Music/iTunes/Album Artwork -> /Volumes/BigDrive/iTunes Artwork. I did that with one user and it worked fine - copied Album Artwork folder and set soft link and voila, all the art. I also set all permissions to allow r/w from everyone.
But when I set the soft link from 2nd user, iTunes shows no art. I can browse all the art files fine from that users Finder.
Thanks for any help!
mac mini Mac OS X (10.4.9) iTunes 7.1.1

And just like that I may have found the solution! IT suddenly occured to me that one of the settings that got changed when we imported my wife's profile was a change to the sleep settings. Previously, I had had my iMac set to never go to sleep, since it shares our media with the rest of the house and runs eyeTV to record TV shows and such. For a little while after my wife's account was imported the settings to changes so that the computer would go to sleep after 15 minutes. I'm not totally sure why, but I think having that set up somehow meant that when we switched accounts my other account just "went to sleep" and therefore stopped sharing the iTunes library. After I noticed the change and switched the computer back to "never" for sleep the problem seems to have stopped.
So perhaps check your sleep settings? That seems to be the only change I can think of that got things working correclty for me. I'll keep digging though and see if I can find any more helpful info. Good luck!

Soft links and xcode projects

In other unix environments using soft links ("ln -s") is a handy way of "abstracting away" at the file system level what a file or directory actually contains, so that its contents can be easily changed without having to modify the original file or directory. In other words, if I have eg. three versions of the same file, and several projects share the usage of one of those files, I can easily change which version of the file those projects will use by simply making a softlink that points to the file I want, and make those projects depend on that softlink (they see it as a regular file). If I later want to change the file in question, I only need to change the softlink to point to another version of the file.
This is especially useful when dealing with a third-party library that gets regular updates. I can install the third-party library somewhere, with the version number of the library in the directory name, and have a more generic directory name as a softlink (as a concrete example, I could have a softlink named "cocos2d" pointing to a directory named "cocos2d-iphone-0.99.5"). If I update the library, I can install it in a new directory (eg. "cocos2d-iphone-1.0.1") and simply change the softlink to point to the new directory, and then recompile the projects that depend on it.
The problem is that Xcode doesn't like softlinks. I don't know if this is a feature of MacOS X in general, or a quirk in Xcode in particular. The problem is that Xcode doesn't want any softlinks in any of its paths, and instead always resolves where the softlink is really pointing to. Thus if I add, for example, the file "libraries/cocos2d/cocos2d-ios.xcodeproj" to the project, what ends up in the project is actually a reference to "libraries/cocos2d-iphone-0.99.5/cocos2d-ios.xcodeproj". Thus the whole softlink is circumvented, making it useless. If I update the library in question, I have to go through all the projects that use it and change the references to point to the new directory. This causes only needless extra work.
This resolving of softlinks only happens when adding a new file to the xcode project. Xcode doesn't seem to change them afterwards, if they already exist in the project. In the past I could get around this problem by editing the project file directly with a text editor and forcing the path to refer to the softlink. However, all the paths in xcode 4 projects seem to be obfuscated, making this impossible. Another possibility is to rename the directory in question with the name of the softlink, then add it to the project, then restore its original name and then add the soft link.
Is there any better way of doing this?

Hello I have probably exact same problem with source files whereas a constant location (my softlink) points to different version of the sources in a repository. For example:
../MyProject/DependantProjetXyz could point to
../Repository/DependantProjectXyz/V1.0
../Repository/DependantProjectXyz/V1.1
My xcode project is setup with ../MyProject/DependantProjetXyz which is pretty useful as I don't need to update all the include and lib path everytime I update the dependancies.
The main problem I am facing is that if I have a compilation error in the dependancies, xcode isn't able to automatically bring me to the error. It simply open the file and position at the very first line in the file. No highlight.
I am forced to use contextual menu on the error then reveal in the log to find the line number and manually navigate to that line. In other words, I am almost back to good old command line compilation with separate text editor...
BTW, this was all working fine before upgrade to xcode 4.
Was a bug filed on this issue?

JDK 1.3 Soft Links in CLASSPATH

Hi,
I found that the JDK1.3 javac compiler doesn't
follow soft-links in unix filesystem. Whereas in
JDK1.1.6 I was able to specify classpath through
soft links also.
Can anyone give more insight into this? Can this
behavior be tailored - either via JDK or UNIX?
Thanks,
Hari

This looks like Bug 4266026 in the Bug Database. It's fixed in JDK 1.4 and maybe 1.3.1.
http://developer.java.sun.com/developer/bugParade/bugs/4266026.html

When I create an album in iphoto am I duplicating pictures or just creating links?

When I create an album in iphoto am I duplicating pictures or just creating links? My iphoto is slow and I'm wondering if I am bogging it down. Thanks.

How many Photos? How much Ram? What Mac? How muc free space on the Disk? And, how slow is "slow to start up"?
Are you running a Managed or a Referenced Library?
A Managed Library, is the default setting, and iPhoto copies files into the iPhoto Library when Importing. The files are then stored in the Library package
A Referenced Library is when iPhoto is NOT copying the files into the iPhoto Library when importing because you made a change at iPhoto -> Preferences -> Advanced. (You unchecked the option to copy files into the Library on import) The files are then stored where ever you put them and not in the Library package. In this scenario you are responsible for the File Management.

Classloader & soft links & stat calls

Solaris 7 - WLAS 4.5.1
Our servlet class loader is loading classes that it resolves thru a soft
link, we are having lots of stat calls. We cannot get the performance to a
satisfactory level, does anyone have any idea about performance with respect
to loading classes and the soft linked directory structure?
Thanks,
James

We have a stable 4.5.1 that we are migrating to another server, given that
we have a stable system we want to migrate as-is to the new server, then
migrate from 4.5.1 to 5.1 ... then to 6.x. I cannot convince the client to
go to a new server with a new application server all in one step.
James
"Mike Reiche" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:3b603e4e$[email protected]..
>
Same answer as to your other question. WLS 5.1.
You can spend weeks or months trying to figure this out or got to 5.1 andget
it over with.
What's the point in solving the problem for 4.5.1 if
1) going to 5.1 is painless
2) you're going to go to 5.1 anyway
Mike
"James Carlson" <[email protected]> wrote:
Solaris 7 - WLAS 4.5.1
Our servlet class loader is loading classes that it resolves thru a soft
link, we are having lots of stat calls. We cannot get the performance
to a
satisfactory level, does anyone have any idea about performance with
respect
to loading classes and the soft linked directory structure?
Thanks,
James

Soft links and endpoints

Hello,
I would be grateful if someone would confirm to me the following:
A soft link always relates to an external endpoint.
Is the above statement true?
Julien.

Soft, hard, and standard links always apply to internal endpoints (external and internal endpoints are defined by the spec in section 5.1.7). They are used to govern connections made by the NMR between service consumers and providers.
External endpoints are used only for endpoint reference (EPR) generation. (External service providers are considered internal endpoints, since they are proxied by the binding components.)

Soft links and inodes

It's my understanding that a unix file consists of three components: a filename, an inode, and the data. So if you create a text file called "original", you get something like this:
original -------> inode ------> data
Then if you create a soft link to the original file, the soft link has its own filename, inode, and data--where the data is the filename of the original file. So for instance, if you use the command:
$ cat soft_link
it traverses the chain:
softlink-->softlink's inode-->data-->original-->original's inode-->original's data
On the other hand, if you create a hard link to the original file, the hard link does not get its own inode; its filename points to the original file's inode. So for instance, if you use the command:
$cat hard_link
it traverses the chain:
hard_link ---> original's inode ---> original's data
and then the original's data is displayed.
However, on mac os x when I do an ls -i on the soft link to display its inode, it displays the same inode number as the original file. Furthermore, if I rm(remove) the original file and recreate it using touch original, the new original gets a new inode number, and the soft_link's inode changes to the new inode. I don't understand that. I expected that the soft_link initially would have a different inode number than the original, and that the soft link's inode would not change when the original was recreated.

You may want to read this page: http://linuxgazette.net/105/pitcher.html
It contains a pretty good explanation of the difference between a soft link and a hard link but it doesn't directly answer your question about the inodes. However, it appears that there's a subtle difference in the way "ls" acts depending on whether you give it a filename or not and depending on whether you use the "-l" option in conjunction with "-i".
Here, with filenames and without "-l" it appears that basic.file and softlink.file have the same inodes:
<pre>
iMacHerman:~/Desktop/temptest steve$ ls -i basic.file
3723769 basic.file
iMacHerman:~/Desktop/temptest steve$ ls -i softlink.file
3723769 softlink.file
</pre>
Yet here, without filenames and using the "-l" option you can see that the softlink.file's inode is different (while hardlink.file is the same):
<pre>
iMacHerman:~/Desktop/temptest steve$ ls -li
total 24
3723769 -rw-r--r-- 2 steve steve 27 Feb 24 08:01 basic.file
3723769 -rw-r--r-- 2 steve steve 27 Feb 24 08:01 hardlink.file
3723768 lrwxr-xr-x 1 steve steve 10 Feb 24 07:59 softlink.file -> basic.file
</pre>
Here using both a filename and "-l" you again get softlink.file's actual inode:
<pre>
iMacHerman:~/Desktop/temptest steve$ ls -li softlink.file
3723768 lrwxr-xr-x 1 steve steve 10 Feb 24 07:59 softlink.file -> basic.file
</pre>
And here leaving off filename gives you softlink's actual inode even though the "-l" option was not used:
<pre>
iMacHerman:~/Desktop/temptest steve$ ls -i
3723769 basic.file 3723769 hardlink.file 3723768 softlink.file
</pre>
So it appears that if you do not use the "-l" option and you give "ls" a filename that it follows the softlink and reports the inode of the original file. Other variations (using "-l" or leaving off the soft link's filename list the soft link's actual inode. This seems a little confusing to me and possibly a bug in "ls"... but maybe there's a reason for it working this way???
Steve
PS - and if you do what you described, delete and then recreate the original "basic.file" it will get a new inode. And if you use the first variation of "ls" (without "-l" but with softlink's filename) then it will indeed appear that softlink's inode changed to match the new basic.file
<pre>
iMacHerman:~/Desktop/temptest steve$ rm basic.file
iMacHerman:~/Desktop/temptest steve$ touch basic.file
iMacHerman:~/Desktop/temptest steve$ ls -i basic.file
3723912 basic.file
iMacHerman:~/Desktop/temptest steve$ ls -i softlink.file
3723912 softlink.file
</pre>
But using one of the other options shows that softlink's actual inode did not change:
<pre>
iMacHerman:~/Desktop/temptest steve$ ls -li
total 16
3723912 -rw-r--r-- 1 steve steve 0 Feb 24 08:29 basic.file
3723769 -rw-r--r-- 1 steve steve 27 Feb 24 08:01 hardlink.file
3723768 lrwxr-xr-x 1 steve steve 10 Feb 24 07:59 softlink.file -> basic.file
</pre>

Use a soft link to move /Users to another volume

I'd like to move /Users to another volume, so that I can have the OS and applications on an SSD, without having to get an SSD of several terabytes.
Users log in to a Mac Pro using Active Directory accounts. Consequently, they do not have accounts on the Mac, and I cannot use Mac user properties to move their home directories. Also, the set of users who can log in is limited only by the AD user base, which has tens of thousands of entries. Of course, I cannot change the AD schema. So it has to be a solution that happens automatically. If a new user logs, her home directory must be automatically created on a volume which is not the startup.
I made a soft link from the startup volume to the new volume where I want the homes to go. This seems to work. After a restart, all the applications I tried had no problem following the soft link.
Is there any danger here? Or is there some better solution? I tried, following a suggestion which apparently worked in older versions of the OS, to make an entry in /etc/fstab to mount the new disk as /Users. This did not work in Mavericks (my test machine). The new disk appeared in Disk Utility, but could not be mounted. Perhaps it would work on Mountain Lion, which is the machine where this change ultimately needs to be implemented.
I will be obliged for any suggestions or warnings.

Reading through the article you referenced, I noticed they talked about downsides to moving home directory.
The issue about non-boot drives not being as protected as the boot drive.
Specifically related to permissions. I'm not exactly sure what they mean. If you ignore permissions on the non-boot drive that means that others can browse any of those files?
I'm assuming they mean you would have to change the permissions on the non-boot drive? But does that mean that only the original owner can change those permissions? Or can any user change permissions on a non-boot drive?
How is this different from user files on the boot drive? Can't you change permissions on your home directory?
I'm interested in moving my directory to the non-boot drive, so I'd like to understand the downsides. Especially anything related to user security.
Thanks.

Mass duplicates in iphoto vers 7, its a mess

hello
somehow, after installing leopard and doing a get all images, it installed 23,000+ plus photos. i have infinate duplictates, it also brought in all the thumbs as actual images. all the dates are wrong, everything is so scattered, ive tried going in and deleting images one by one but its taking forever, and sometimes, there will be a "set" then a duplicate set will be many "folders" down and thus its practically impossible to keep scrolling up and down to double check what should and should not be deleted. i cant just delete all images in the iphoto cuase i assume all wiill be lost. i know i tunes has a show duplicates feature, but i do not see anything like this in iphoto ( iahe iphoto 08 vers 7 by the way). is there some kinda way i can match up images or sometghing anything to make eliminating the infoante duplicates and erroneous thumbnails from showing up as part of my library?
i am guessing that my actual photo count showul be around 5000. also, this is obviously consuming valuable HD space.
any help or thoughts will be much appreciated. i am sorry i winded on, but i wanted to be clear in my explanation.
also, anyone else ever had this? and also, i promise to post my solution / experince if i get one.
thanks, wayne

brie fly
thanks for responding. its actually alonger stiry than that, i had inherited an old powerbook, there were tow accounts on it, somehow when i opned i photo on that machine, it brought in all the images. i then got a new powerbook, migrated the account and all them photos followed over. i recnetly did a clean install of osx11, so as to try to clear up the mess, i did a back up opf all my files and then copied them over one set at a time, when i did iphoto all the images came over. they are a mess. it is only iphotos, not photos from all over my machine/s. photos originally downloaded form my camera, no where else. i just have zillions of copies of single images and the extra irritating thing is that even the thumbs are now showing as images in the library. its photos going back to 2001, my kids growing up and stuff, i cant just delete thems.

Upload maveric Imovie/now what MY Iphoto IMAGES? its a mess!

I did not finnishUpdating downloading imovie,,and now... I DID and am given a chose ??or what of what to keep?
MY MOVIES ARE GONE" as also I see 2 versions of iphoto Blacked up and TO ' choose what!
I do not understand I believe I might press wrong thing..mac Air 10.9.2 Maverick, and Iphoto i movie
and the One Iphoto I see blank Paltreed squares where IMAGES USE TO BE/or rather events! plu my Movies are all gone! DANGIT!
my husband is in Dubai..I am at a loss,
Plus more awfull things'

linda annfrommatawan wrote:
why does this say MAC OSX and nOT MAVRICK v10.9.2
Linda ~ If by "this" you mean the text automatically inserted at the end of your post, it comes from the product list in your ASC profile — which you can update. Then, next time you post, you should see the correct information. See this tutorial:
Update your product list
linda annfrommatawan wrote:
maveric (...) maverick (...) MAVRICK
It looks like you’re trying to spell Mavericks
⦿ Yes
○ No
❑ Don’t show me this tip again
OS X Mavericks is named after the surfing location in California. Click on the image below to see a video of OS X Mavericks being announced by Apple:

I have a desktop iMac,within a yr old, I had iPhoto 9,downloaded to iPhoto 11, now lost my export to Shutterfly link, & looks like all my photos went to thumbnails, with poor resolution...help!!

I have a desktop iMac OSX 10.6.8, had iPhoto 9 & downloading software update to iPhoto 11, (9.1.5??) I can't find the way to reset up the "Export to Shutterfly mode" and it looks like all my previous photos went to a thumbnail size...with now poor resolution. If I would have know my pictures were going to turn into poor quality pictures, I never would have done the software update. Need a real person to talk to. This complicated method is not user friendly.
< Edited By Host >

I strongly recommend that you remove your contact information, especially your phone number, from this public forum.

IPhoto '11 and previous version Projects missing their linked photos

This concerns iPhoto '11 (9.2.1) running under Lion 10.7.2. Fully maintained.
For the past couple of years my wife has been making iPhoto hardcover books ('projects') using photos from within various versions of iPhoto. Yesterday she completed her latest book and uploaded it off for printing. She then decided to order an additional copy of a book she'd made a couple of years ago, and opened the project file in iPhoto. For a brief moment there was a screen caption saying 'upgrading', and then a message to say upgrading was successful, and please to check book before printing.
So she did - and whilst the pages and layouts were there, and text captions, ALL the inserted photos were missing! All the photos show up in the source list on the righthandside of iPhoto, but none of them are linked into the project book! She checked back into previous books (projects), and other than a couple of recent books, all were the same - the pages, layout and text were fine, but no linked-in photos.
So quitting iPhoto and reopening command-option to get to the maintenance section, ticking all the boxes to examine and rebuild, after a few hours the result was the same - all the past projects were devoid of linked-in pictures!
Worse still - the project she completed yesterday, and had sent for printing, now had some of its photos inserted sideways, or upside-down! Clicking on the photo on the page opens it the correct way around, and not as shown on the page layout!
Going back into TimeMachine and extracting the iPhoto library from 6 months ago, opening it in iPhoto '11 (9.2.1) on a different machine gives the same result as above - the 'upgrading' message, the 'success and check' message, and the resultant unlinked photos. NOTE: once a previous project has been selected from the list, the 'upgrading' process is instant, unstoppable and not undoable.
Do anyone have any explanantions or suggestions on how to resolve these issues?

well....
update this post.....
It's strange.... I have news.... maybe I have the solution but I have to test if I have lost something....
I opened time machine and simply cut & paste Pictures folder from backup to my folder, then opened iphoto with option key .... iphoto check updates on net and download last updates showing a popup that informes me that updating library to last iphoto version I will not be able to see photos with previous version of iphoto.
once updated the software i can see all photos..... now i just have to check if there are all photos and i have not lost anything.....
^_^

Slices get messed up when linking

Has anyone been having funny problems with slices when you
make links for them? Linking messes up the whole page and breaks
away all the other slices a bit. Yes, I realize they go back into
place after linking by clicking on the outside. They do rearrange
but are not connected by a couple of millimeters or less around all
edges. I checked the border settings and they are zeroed. Any
clues?

> Any clues?
First clue would be to validate the page - this sounds like
invalid HTML to
me....
Murray --- ICQ 71997575
Adobe Community Expert
(If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!)
==================
http://www.projectseven.com/go
- DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
http://www.dwfaq.com - DW FAQs,
Tutorials & Resources
==================
"djprall" <[email protected]> wrote in
message
news:g8hvfv$9fu$[email protected]..
> Has anyone been having funny problems with slices when
you make links for
> them?
> Linking messes up the whole page and breaks away all the
other slices a
> bit.
> Yes, I realize they go back into place after linking by
clicking on the
> outside. They do rearrange but are not connected by a
couple of
> millimeters or
> less around all edges. I checked the border settings and
they are zeroed.
> Any
> clues?
>

Photo album & gallery views mess up with links and lay out

Hi,
Am having a weird problem in album/gallery function.
I added links on the album page, but after viewing the gallery, reverting back to the album the link stopped working (main problem), and in the gallery page the link does not appear in cases or is lay-outed very close and then more below.
Obviously I tried already by duplicating my 2 pages that work quite well and remake the other pages, but the problem persists.
Anybody can help ?
Following is a description:
http://web.mac.com/drieke.tom/Caravanserai/Gilles_works.html
Album view is fine, link at the bottom works.
Click through to gallery of photos: link at the bottom of page is gone.
Going "Back to Album": link at bottom does not work
On following page s. th similar happens
http://web.mac.com/drieke.tom/Caravanserai/collaboration_works.html
Click through to gallery of photos: link at the bottom of page does work, but is now much lower on the page.
Going "Back to Album": link at bottom does not work
In my other similar pages it works,
though there are some minor gliches as well:
1/
http://web.mac.com/drieke.tom/Caravanserai/Tom_works.html
You click a photo in the album and it shows the enlargened photo with tumbnails. Though my link at the bottom is very close to the photo.
Browse through the photos and when you do "Back to Album", it goes back to the album at once, and with my link at the bottom, it reverts to the main page: "Exhibition"
2/
http://web.mac.com/drieke.tom/Caravanserai/Gilles_press.html
In photo gallery mode, link at bottom is there and works, but very close to photo title.
Going "Back to Album": link at bottom does work !!
WHAT GOES WRONG ?
ANYBODY CAN HELP ?
Thanks
Tom

Tom:
Have you tried doing a "Publish All to .Mac" or publishing to a folder on the desktop and seeing it things work there. Often the Publish All will fixe issues I'm having.
OT

IPhoto 9.1.1 ('11) messed up soft links

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for