On Sun, 7 Nov 2010, bnr bnr wrote:

> in the preferences window, select music and uncheck the box where it 
> says something about watching your library for new files.

Thanks.  I probably should have explained that I know about that, and this 
is a different problem.  I have the box unchecked.  I'm not sure if the 
"checking" (rhythmbox's word for it) it is doing is the same as the 
scanning procedure, but it probably is different.  It might just be 
checking for the existence of the files in the specified locations.  It's 
just a very bad plan for it to do that.  I should at least be allowed to 
tell it to stop.

Mike


On Sun, 7 Nov 2010, Mike Miller wrote:

> Back story:
>
> Do any of you use rhythmbox?  It's supposed to be an iTunes replacement 
> for Linux systems.  I gave it a try, had it recurse my audio file 
> directory tree and it seemed to find everything (much better than iTunes 
> on Windows a few years ago -- it only found half of the files) and I 
> really like the xml format it uses for the db and that it allows the 
> user to specify the db file at startup (--rhythmdb-file option).  The 
> file location is given in the <location> field in the xml and it can be 
> a local file (file://) or a URL. This also makes it possible to do cool 
> stuff like translate the locations (using perl, say) from file:// to 
> http:// so that you can access them remotely if you have a web server on 
> the machine, or you can copy the db to another machine and edit the 
> locations to have a different mount point.
>
> Question:
>
> Whenever I start up rhythmbox, it checks all of the files.  I'm not sure 
> of what it is checking, and it runs pretty fast per file, when the files 
> are on a local drive, but any checking is pointless when I know the 
> files haven't changed.  It is a very serious problem when the files are 
> located on an internet server and you have more than 50,000 files.  I 
> need to find a way to make rhythmbox stop checking, or maybe never start 
> checking. There are a few options that seem like they would work, but 
> they don't work so I'm hoping someone here will have an idea.  None of 
> these options do the trick:
>
>   --no-update              Do not update the library with file changes
>   -n, --no-registration    Do not register the shell
>   --dry-run                Don't save any data permanently (implies 
> --no-registration)
>
> Thanks.
>
> Mike