Thank you for the explanation.
Are you sure, though, that the AppImage is actually unpacked, rather than just mounted (file-system in user space)?
kofa@eagle:~$ mount
...
Filmulator_v0.11.2rc11.AppImage on /tmp/.mount_FilmulIPK11W type fuse.Filmulator_v0.11.2rc11.AppImage (ro,nosuid,nodev,relatime,user_id=1000,group_id=1000)
Dive in and have a look at your /tmp folder, this is digikam on my installation. Seem to be actual files.
All mounted file systems hold files, whether they are from a hard disk, a network share, an SD card or a mounted CD image. That directory under /tmp is just a mount point, and Iām pretty sure the contents are read directly from the AppImage via FUSE. Thatās why mount lists the image file, and thatās why the files are read-only (check the editorās title bar in your screenshot). The āroā in mountās output ((ro,nosuid,nodev,relatime,user_id=1000,group_id=1000)) means read-only.
I see this thread going on about the source of the install, but the statement you made indicates it just isnāt supported. Not following what installing from another source will do.
So are mounts to NTFS just not supported in Digikam? If thatās the answer fine, I just am thrown off by the long thread about installing from an app image, not sure what that is solving, or does it solve the problem? Has anyone confirmed?
For Digikam, itās simple: if you can see the files in a file manager, digikam can see them (its album structure has a 1:1 correspondence with the underlying directory structure). Sorry, Iām not using NTFS, so donāt know if Linux can handle it. (for darktable, itās basically the same)
Some issues ca be due to different install methods, e.g. snap or flatpak, where the snap or flatpak blocks access to certain parts of the file system. In that case, digikam wonāt āseeā those parts of the filesystem, and canāt use themā¦
And all the noise about appimage is due to appimage being the āofficialā Linux package thatās distributed, afaik. If for one reason or another that doesnāt work, you have to find another solution (OBS usually ends up having a package for a decent number of distributions).
IIRC in the past it was basically a case of installing cifs-utils and mounting the share. Is that not true anymore?
Sameā¦ at some point I had to mount NTFS drives in Linux and this wasnāt a problem They even support writing to them now. But that was ages ago and I quickly erased that souvenir from my mind (in the same batch as my very modest contribution to the VisualBasic code corpus on this planet).
