After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 704669 - 2.8.6 startup slow as hell since new plugins are queried every single time
2.8.6 startup slow as hell since new plugins are queried every single time
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 703113
Product: GIMP
Classification: Other
Component: General
2.8.6
Other Windows
: Normal major
: ---
Assigned To: GIMP Bugs
GIMP Bugs
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2013-07-22 11:06 UTC by Jorg K
Modified: 2013-07-22 12:36 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Description Jorg K 2013-07-22 11:06:53 UTC 
GIMP 2.8.4:
Upon first launch after installation:
"Querying new Plug-ins"
Subsequent launches don't show this and are much faster.

GIMP 2.8.6:
Upon **every** launch:
"Querying new Plug-ins"

This makes the lauch of GIMP on Windows, which is already a little on the slow side, **unbearably** slow, especially on some older hardware.

I uninstalled, reinstalled, deleted .gimp-2.8. No change, still insists on querying the plug-ins upon lauch.

I know it's free software, but shouldn't someone have started it twice before shipping it? Or is this a new feature?
Comment 1 Michael Natterer 2013-07-22 11:15:56 UTC 
We never try our software before shipping it.
Comment 2 Michael Schumacher 2013-07-22 11:39:02 UTC 
Sorry, but we are too busy resolving bug reports as duplicates, this leaves no time to test the software before shipping it.

Thanks for the bug report. This particular bug has already been reported into our bug tracking system, but please feel free to report any further bugs you find.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 703113 ***
Comment 3 Jorg K 2013-07-22 12:09:43 UTC 
Sorry about the duplicate. I looked for open bugs on the issue and found none, since it's already resolved. My mistake.

Sorry about the sarcasm, but it seems that it was only started once to try before shipping ;-) IMHO it's quite an embarrassing bug, that could have been picked up easily.
Comment 4 Michael Schumacher 2013-07-22 12:32:55 UTC 
Only if we assume that any of the developers or packagers run 32-Bit Windows platforms. They don't.
Comment 5 Jorg K 2013-07-22 12:36:42 UTC 
OK. Now I get it. I didn't notice it at home on the "big" machine (64 bit). I only discovered it on my old laptop running 32 bit.