Interview With Fabio - Ubuntu Developer

[Albert]

'Forum Post wrote:
<snip>
> You should not play with .gonf files... 
And you should not accuse me of 'playing'.  I tried to get rid of the 
baobab config file when it became obvious that removing Baobab did not 
do so.  Attempting to reinstall Baobab was ineffective because of the 
persistence of bad data in the config file from the previous install.

> I told you that, due to a bug
> on a gconf key, you had only to opne the GConf Configuration Editor
> from menu and clear the noscan key. That's it.

Indeed, "That's it".  Unfortunately, this information from you came to 
me AFTER I had moved the config file to trash, AFTER it was left 
corrupted by Baobab.

> Tomorrow new version 2.2.1 will be online without this bug.
> 
> Concerning the size, try unchecking the "Allocated Size" checkbox.

I assume you mean the "Allocated Space" checkbox.  What is the function 
of a checked "Allocated Space" checkbox, except to display erroneous 
diskspace figures?  BTW, you discard that change to the checkbox and it 
therefore always starts with the boxed checked.  Very tedious to 
remember to uncheck it and manually start the scan with every startup.

> You
> should have a file that erroneously reports an allocated size too
> large. 

By your reasoning I would have to have such a file in many directories:

Baobab reports allocated space so:
etc		7.7GB
lib		46.9GB
mnt		343.3GB
var		40.3GB
usr		370.1GB
usr/lib		176.0GB
usr/X11R6	3.5GB
usr/share	162.7GB
etc, etc. etc.
I think if you will cease to be so defensive and examine your code, you 
will find a bug accounts for these erroneous sizes, and not some rogue 
"file that erroneously reports an allocated size too large."

> Try investingating with "Show all files in folder". 

I assume you mean "List all files in folder".

> This function will show you both apparent and allocated sizes. 
> Sizes in Baobab has been deeply tested with GnomeVFS functions.

So?  Have you verified that what is being posted to the screen is what 
is actually being reported by your functions?  You have a bug, son. 
Plain and simple.  There is no need to get snippy with me and attempt to 
shift the blame.  What are the chances that a standard Ubuntu install on 
a common Dell box with be cluttered with rogue files "that erroneously 
reports an allocated size too large."