Okay, I disabled all apps and the issue remains: the log still gets a new ”not exist” entry when I select ”Admin”.

Ha, got it! It’s the act of selecting ”Admin” from the ”admin” dropdown menu (top right) that triggers it. Nothing else seems to do it (”Users” from the same menu for example doesn’t trigger it).

There’s now also this in the log:

File does not exist: /var/www/userhome/mummila/sites/mummila.kapsi.fi/secure-www/oc/assets/dist, referer: https://mummila.kapsi.fi/oc/index.php/apps/gallery/

But I’d wager it’s completely unrelated to the other ”not exist”, as I only activated asset-pipeline yesterday. Browser’s JS log says it’s missing assets/dist/jquery-migrate.min.map; it doesn’t say anything about the data directory that the server log complains about.

While poking around, I also noticed that for my non-admin OC user, selecting Pictures from the Apps menu brings up the Pictures view, but it fails to load any pictures. The loading spinner just keeps spinning forever. The admin user’s Pictures view does work, i.e. it actually loads the pictures too. I’m not sure if this is related to the log issue either, but thought I’d mention it anyway.

Any ideas on how I can narrow this down further?

@schiesbn Sure. I’ve haphazardly tried it already, but I’ll give it a proper go sometime soon.

### Description
The Apache log file for my Owncloud site sporadically registers ”File does not exist: *[my OC root directory]*/data” errors from Owncloud; these go back to at least July last year (2014). To me this appears as if OC was erroneusly trying to access a hard-coded path for the data directory under the OC root, whereas my data directory actually resides elsewhere, entirely outside www my root, and there is no data directory under OC root.

The error timestamps indicate they only occur during daytime when I’m interacting with my installation (I’m the sole user), possibly only through the web interface, as I have the desktop client always on but the errors are rare relative to that. I use the web interface less and I think it corresponds to the timestamps better (but not all web interactions result in the error either, and I haven’t been able to pinpoint any specific action that triggers it).

Apart from those errors in the log my Owncloud installation appears work just fine, so the issue seems pretty harmless. I’ve considered creating an empty data directory under the OC root in case that might make the error go away, but then again it might just break something. Anyway, because it looks like a bug, I figured I’d better report it.

### Server configuration
**Operating system**: Debian Wheezy (I think; I’m a non-privileged user on shared hosting)

**Web server:** Apache/2.2

**Database:** MySQL 5.5.43

**PHP version:** 5.4.39-0+deb7u2

**ownCloud version:** 8.0.4.2

**Updated from an older ownCloud or fresh install:** updated

**List of activated apps:**
* Activity 1.2.0
* Deleted files 0.6.2
* External storage support 0.2.3
* First Run Wizard 1.1
* PDF Viewer 0.7
* Pictures 0.6.0
* Share Files 0.6.1
* Text Editor 0.4
* Updater 0.4
* Versions 1.0.5
* Video Viewer 0.1.3

**The content of config/config.php:**

”`
’datadirectory’ => ’/siilo/users/mummila/owncloud-data’,
’asset-pipeline.enabled’ => true,
’dbtableprefix’ => ’oc_’,
’dbtype’ => ’mysql’,
’forcessl’ => true,
’installed’ => true,
’logdateformat’ => ’l, j. F Y’,
’loglevel’ => 3,
’mail_smtpmode’ => ’smtp’,
’mail_smtpport’ => ’465’,
’mail_smtpsecure’ => ’ssl’,
’maintenance’ => false,
’max_filesize_animated_gifs_public_sharing’ => 5,
’preview_max_filesize_image’ => 5,
’session_lifetime’ => 60 * 60 * 24 * 15,
’theme’ => ”,
’version’ => ’8.0.4.2’,
”`

**Are you using external storage, if yes which one:** none

**Are you using encryption:** no

**Are you using an external user-backend, if yes which one:** none

### Client configuration
**Browser:** Chromium 37.0.2062.120 (build 281580)

**Operating system:** Ubuntu 12.04

### Logs
#### Web server error log
”`
[Sun Jun 14 13:57:52 2015] [error] [client 217.30.184.173] File does not exist: /var/www/use
rhome/mummila/sites/mummila.kapsi.fi/secure-www/oc/data
[Sun Jun 14 13:58:47 2015] [error] [client 217.30.184.173] File does not exist: /var/www/use
rhome/mummila/sites/mummila.kapsi.fi/secure-www/oc/data
[Sun Jun 14 14:29:18 2015] [error] [client 217.30.184.173] File does not exist: /var/www/use
rhome/mummila/sites/mummila.kapsi.fi/secure-www/oc/data
”`

#### ownCloud log (data/owncloud.log)

(No recent events coinciding with the log above. Last entry below, with my desktop IP address redacted, from two days ago)
”`
{”reqId”:”71513d1b6f44276a8cd6cad21bc98864″,”remoteAddr”:”[my desktop IP]”,”app”:”PHP”,”message”:”Undefined index: extension at \/var\/www\/userhome\/mummila\/sites\/mummila.kapsi.fi\/www\/oc\/apps\/files_versions\/lib\/storage.php#320″,”level”:3,”time”:”2015-06-12T04:37:22+00:00″}
”`

The Unity Dash context menu for Rhythmbox currently has separate items for ”Play” and ”Pause”. I think Totem does better by eliminating those for a single ”Play/Pause” item which does both. I also think the interface should be consistent across these two applications. Rhythmbox-client even supports the same parameter as totem for this (–play-pause), so I created a patch for rhythmbox.desktop based on totem.desktop, which should accomplish what I’m after.

”Niin, että voi herättää keskustelua niissä, jotka vielä blogauksia jaksavat lukea. Itseasiassa en tiedä, jaksaako kukaan enää.”
Minä jaksan.

Oletko Twitterissä? Millä nimellä?

Using the KDE4 GUI (on a regular Ubuntu Unity desktop), the log prints (at least some) Scandinavian characters wrongly. I’ll attach a screenshot for demonstration. Meanwhile, the log viewer of the Gnome GUI displays the same characters without problems (I’ll attach a screenshot of that as well).

jani@saegusa:~$ apt-cache policy backintime-kde4
backintime-kde4:
Asennettu: 1.0.36~precise
Ehdokas: 1.0.36~precise
Versiotaulukko:
*** 1.0.36~precise 0
500 http://ppa.launchpad.net/bit-team/stable/ubuntu/ precise/main amd64 Packages
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status

jani@saegusa:~$ locale
LANG=fi_FI.UTF-8
LANGUAGE=fi:en
LC_CTYPE=fi_FI.UTF-8
LC_NUMERIC=”fi_FI.UTF-8″
LC_TIME=”fi_FI.UTF-8″
LC_COLLATE=fi_FI.UTF-8
LC_MONETARY=”fi_FI.UTF-8″
LC_MESSAGES=fi_FI.UTF-8
LC_PAPER=”fi_FI.UTF-8″
LC_NAME=”fi_FI.UTF-8″
LC_ADDRESS=”fi_FI.UTF-8″
LC_TELEPHONE=”fi_FI.UTF-8″
LC_MEASUREMENT=”fi_FI.UTF-8″
LC_IDENTIFICATION=”fi_FI.UTF-8″
LC_ALL=

Te naiset ootte niin ulkonäkökohtaisia!

In case you’re still amused to read this, let me explain my confusion.

1) From your first reply above, I gathered you consider it valid to call animals atheists.

2) From your first reply to me, I gathered you consider it technically valid to also call rocks atheists, but somewhat misusing the term (as it’s not what it ”is meant to describe”), like calling rocks blind.

3) Those two premises lead me to ask my question, to pinpoint where the difference between the two in your view stems from: why isn’t calling animals atheists equally wrong.

4) In your answer, I felt you said the two claims (”animals are atheists”, ”rocks are atheists/blind”) are equally valid, which obviously goes against my assumption in 2) and thus broke my chain of reasoning about yours.

From your comments in the other thread below, I see you write atheism ”is the simply the absence of the position that they do exist”. If I’m (finally) reading you correctly and put it another way, you don’t preclude a question (in the most abstract sense) of their position being posable for someone/-thing to be considered atheist; this would suggest that my mistake was at 2), assuming you consider ”rocks being atheist” somewhat less correct than ”animals being atheist”, when in reality you consider them just as valid: an object (in your view) does not have to be able to be theist to be rightly called atheist.

As I said, I have no strong inclination about this myself, but writing this I do seem to see at the back of my mind a tendency to presuppose at least a potential for theism for a creature/object being validly considered an atheist. It doesn’t mean they’ve been posed the question of supernatural beings, just that they have the potential to develop such ideas. This would obviously exclude rocks, as they lack even the remotest potential of developing any ideas at all (and equally, calling them blind would be wrong in the sense that they will never have any potential of seeing).

On the other hand, intelligent, adult animals (such as dolphins) might very well fall into this category of potential theists, and thus be correctly called atheist in this system. Not because they have developed theist views and then rejected them, but just because they have the potential to do so, and haven’t. Very small children (human babies, as well as non-human non-adult animals) would not, because they lack the required capability for the potential to emerge. (Obviously I have no evidence of either intelligent animals’ capability to develop ideas of supernatural, nor of babies’ lack thereof; these are just based on my gut feeling.)

I’m aware of Dawkins’ work (being an atheist myself), but not of his views about animals being atheists or allegories about blind rocks, and unfortunately couldn’t find anything about it on Youtube. (Youtube’s search is pretty bad though.)