mirror of
https://github.com/jellyfin/jellyfin.git
synced 2026-07-16 05:43:54 +03:00
Albums detail pages show crazy large number (like 121795) of tracks #236
Reference in New Issue
Block a user
Delete Branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Originally created by @gerroon on GitHub (Jan 7, 2019).
Originally assigned to: @anthonylavado on GitHub.
Hi
It seems like the albums are showing wrong numbers like 121795 tracks. Please see the image for what is going on. The album actually only has 18 tracks.
It seems like all albums I have in Jellyfin have wrong track numbers like this (121795) whether they have couple tracks or more.
@sparky8251 commented on GitHub (Jan 8, 2019):
@gerroon, if you you could test older versions of JF and see if one of them doesn't have this bug, that would be great.
We've noticed a few regressions that came about in 10.0.0 that weren't present in 3.5.2-5 and one of them might be related to this.
@anthonylavado commented on GitHub (Jan 12, 2019):
So the reason for the high number is now more or less known:
https://github.com/jellyfin/jellyfin/issues/465#issuecomment-453414430
We just need to track down the cause in code.
@anthonylavado commented on GitHub (Feb 1, 2019):
I believe this is fixed by #680?
@anthonylavado commented on GitHub (Feb 3, 2019):
Currently running a test build with #680 included. This issue doesn't appear to occur anymore. Watch for this in the next release.
@gerroon commented on GitHub (Feb 11, 2019):
I still see it, I am using 10.1.0.1 on Debian
@anthonylavado commented on GitHub (Feb 11, 2019):
@gerroon - 10.1.0 doesn’t have the fix it in, it came after that release. The next one (10.2.0) is currently in a release candidate, if you feel like trying it. I have gone through several tests and can confirm this is fixed 🙂
@gerroon commented on GitHub (Feb 11, 2019):
Ok thanks for the update, I will test it and report it here.
@anthonylavado commented on GitHub (Mar 19, 2019):
Oh wow - we never closed this. This was definitely fixed in that release.