Re: [Cin] AppImageLauncher:6412: GdkPixbuf-CRITICAL gdk_pixbuf_-- failed

вт, 9 июл. 2024 г., 03:19 Terje J. Hanssen via Cin < cin@lists.cinelerra-gg.org>: > AppImageLauncher 2.2.0 build 2022 cause several CinGG launch errors on > current openSUSE Tw Slowroll w/Gnome 46.2 > https://github.com/TheAssassin/AppImageLauncher/releases/tag/continuous > > Any solution to solve

Re: [Cin] How to identify if a running CinGG is the Regular or Multibit version?

> > >> Will it be possible to add the version info here? >> > > > well, it was working in the past with configure switches enabling > x264/x265 multibit versions compilation. Now x264 should be always multibit > and x265 patched manually ... I'll think about something but not sure if > there easy w

[Cin] AppImageLauncher:6412: GdkPixbuf-CRITICAL gdk_pixbuf_-- failed

AppImageLauncher 2.2.0 build 2022 cause several CinGG launch errors on current openSUSE Tw Slowroll w/Gnome 46.2 https://github.com/TheAssassin/AppImageLauncher/releases/tag/continuous Any solution to solve this? (Not comparable, but the current CinGG rpm build which is possible to install on

Re: [Cin] How to identify if a running CinGG is the Regular or Multibit version?

вт, 9 июл. 2024 г., 02:35 Terje J. Hanssen via Cin < cin@lists.cinelerra-gg.org>: > > Previously package installations used /usr/bin/cin to start the Regular > version vs /usr/bin/cinx for the 10-bit version (rpm on openSUSE). Now the > Appimage name itself contains Multibit for the latter. > > Bu

[Cin] How to identify if a running CinGG is the Regular or Multibit version?

Previously package installations used /usr/bin/cin to start the Regular version vs /usr/bin/cinx for the 10-bit version (rpm on openSUSE). Now the Appimage name itself contains Multibit for the latter. But for a running CinGG system, "Settings > Preferences | About contains" Built date an