On Sun, 18 Sep 2011 18:55:01 +0200
pk wrote:
> Xmms, I believe it's called. And it's been working fine for quite a
> while (I've actually have never encountered a bug with Audacious), for
> me. Now, when I upgraded to 2.4.x dbus was forced on me (well, that and
> Xfce4)... I'm used to Audacious b
Michael Mol writes:
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 1:10 PM, Alex Schuster
> wrote:
> > And, as an Amarok user... searching my collection, finding song texts,
> > rating songs, wikipedia information for artist, album or a specfic
> > song, tagging, easy sorting of playlists, bookmarks, saving streams
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 10:28 AM, Michael Mol wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 1:10 PM, Alex Schuster wrote:
>> Volker Armin Hemmann writes:
>>
>>> Am Montag 19 September 2011, 20:20:35 schrieb Walter Dnes:
>>> > On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 10:48:10PM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote
>>> >
>>> > > a
Am Dienstag 20 September 2011, 20:19:44 schrieb Thanasis:
> on 09/20/2011 07:50 PM Volker Armin Hemmann wrote the following:
> > Am Montag 19 September 2011, 20:20:35 schrieb Walter Dnes:
> >> On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 10:48:10PM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote
> >>
> >>> alsaplayer. Can't even ge
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 1:10 PM, Alex Schuster wrote:
> Volker Armin Hemmann writes:
>
>> Am Montag 19 September 2011, 20:20:35 schrieb Walter Dnes:
>> > On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 10:48:10PM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote
>> >
>> > > alsaplayer. Can't even get more simplistic. You don't even have
on 09/20/2011 07:50 PM Volker Armin Hemmann wrote the following:
> Am Montag 19 September 2011, 20:20:35 schrieb Walter Dnes:
>> On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 10:48:10PM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote
>>
>>> alsaplayer. Can't even get more simplistic. You don't even have to run a
>>> daemon or server.
Volker Armin Hemmann writes:
> Am Montag 19 September 2011, 20:20:35 schrieb Walter Dnes:
> > On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 10:48:10PM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote
> >
> > > alsaplayer. Can't even get more simplistic. You don't even have to
> > > run a daemon or server. Just playing music.
> >
>
Am Montag 19 September 2011, 20:20:35 schrieb Walter Dnes:
> On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 10:48:10PM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote
>
> > alsaplayer. Can't even get more simplistic. You don't even have to run a
> > daemon or server. Just playing music.
>
> Or mpg321 or mpg123, both of which are c
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 10:48:10PM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote
> alsaplayer. Can't even get more simplistic. You don't even have to run a
> daemon or server. Just playing music.
Or mpg321 or mpg123, both of which are commandline programs.
--
Walter Dnes
On Mon, 19 Sep 2011 14:02:39 -0400, Michael Mol wrote:
> > you don't set it up. It just works. If your sound card does not do
> > hardware mixing (onboard sound doesn't) you are using dmix.
>
> Ah. As I said, I hadn't poked or researched dmix since I read about it
> in LinuxJournal. Pretty sure
Am Montag 19 September 2011, 21:20:30 schrieb Alan McKinnon:
> On Mon, 19 Sep 2011 14:02:39 -0400
>
> Michael Mol wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
> >
> > wrote:
> > > Am Montag 19 September 2011, 12:37:16 schrieb Michael Mol:
> > >> I recall reading about dmix i
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 3:20 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Sep 2011 14:02:39 -0400
> Michael Mol wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
>> wrote:
>> > Am Montag 19 September 2011, 12:37:16 schrieb Michael Mol:
>> >
>> >> I recall reading about dmix in LinuxJourna
On Sun, 18 Sep 2011 23:06:18 +0200
Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> > FWIW, PulseAudio predates Windows Vista, Windows 7, even MacOS X. I
> > ran it on a 200MHz machine back when it was called Enlightenment
> > Sound Daemon.
>
> Pulseaudio was meant to be a drop in replacement for ESD but AFAIK
>
On Mon, 19 Sep 2011 14:02:39 -0400
Michael Mol wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
> wrote:
> > Am Montag 19 September 2011, 12:37:16 schrieb Michael Mol:
> >
> >> I recall reading about dmix in LinuxJournal years ago, but I don't
> >> think I ever got around to settin
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
wrote:
> Am Montag 19 September 2011, 12:37:16 schrieb Michael Mol:
>
>> I recall reading about dmix in LinuxJournal years ago, but I don't
>> think I ever got around to setting it up;
>
> you don't set it up. It just works. If your sound card
Am Montag 19 September 2011, 12:37:16 schrieb Michael Mol:
> I recall reading about dmix in LinuxJournal years ago, but I don't
> think I ever got around to setting it up;
you don't set it up. It just works. If your sound card does not do hardware
mixing (onboard sound doesn't) you are using dm
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 5:07 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
wrote:
> Am Sonntag 18 September 2011, 09:58:10 schrieb Michael Mol:
>> On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 9:37 AM, Volker Armin Hemmann
>>
>> wrote:
>> > Am Sonntag 18 September 2011, 15:19:29 schrieb pk:
>> > again, if it you say 'it must be bad becaus
Am Montag 19 September 2011, 16:21:08 schrieb Paul Colquhoun:
> On Sun, 18 Sep 2011 09:31:56 AM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> > Just don't expect everybody to run our systems without the modern
> > parts of the stack just because a Commodore 64 cannot run it.
> >
> > Many of us actually like the mo
Am Sonntag 18 September 2011, 15:52:16 schrieb Michael Mol:
> On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 1:43 PM, pk wrote:
> > I think you need to take a closer look; it does support a lot of
> > "modern" parts of the "stack" (as you call it); it's just focused on the
> > things that matters (for an embedded system
Am Sonntag 18 September 2011, 09:58:10 schrieb Michael Mol:
> On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 9:37 AM, Volker Armin Hemmann
>
> wrote:
> > Am Sonntag 18 September 2011, 15:19:29 schrieb pk:
> > again, if it you say 'it must be bad because there is a bug in it' you
> > can disregard all software ever writ
Am Sonntag 18 September 2011, 18:55:01 schrieb pk:
> On 2011-09-18 14:56, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > And he's using Audacious - a fork of a gigantic bug nest (mms) .
> > According to his earlier post, it forces dbus to run.
>
> Xmms, I believe it's called. And it's been working fine for quite a
> wh
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 12:23 PM, pk wrote:
> On 2011-09-18 21:52, Michael Mol wrote:
>
>> The kernel configuration process is actually very nice and very easy.
>> You an remove any features you don't want or need. (I'm referring to,
>> e.g. menuconfig. I haven't really used genkernel)
>
> I've ne
On 2011-09-18 21:52, Michael Mol wrote:
> The kernel configuration process is actually very nice and very easy.
> You an remove any features you don't want or need. (I'm referring to,
> e.g. menuconfig. I haven't really used genkernel)
I've never used genkernel and always compile my own kernels..
On Sun, 18 Sep 2011 09:31:56 AM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> Just don't expect everybody to run our systems without the modern
> parts of the stack just because a Commodore 64 cannot run it.
>
> Many of us actually like the modern features of the kernel, glibc,
> udev, dbus, systemd, pulseaudio,
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 1:43 PM, pk wrote:
> I think you need to take a closer look; it does support a lot of
> "modern" parts of the "stack" (as you call it); it's just focused on the
> things that matters (for an embedded system). It is the mindset that I'm
> after; it seems even kernel develope
On Sun, 18 Sep 2011 18:55:01 +0200
pk wrote:
> > And he's using Audacious - a fork of a gigantic bug nest (mms) .
> > According to his earlier post, it forces dbus to run.
>
> Xmms, I believe it's called. And it's been working fine for quite a
> while (I've actually have never encountered a bu
On 2011-09-18 19:41, Indi wrote:
> Install mpd, mpc, and ncmpc. Read the man pages, live happily ever
> after.
Ok, I'll look into it. Thanks!
Best regards
Peter K
On 2011-09-18 15:31, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> Hey, that's really cool.
I agree.
> Just don't expect everybody to run our systems without the modern
> parts of the stack just because a Commodore 64 cannot run it.
I think you need to take a closer look; it does support a lot of
"modern" parts
On Sun, 18 Sep 2011 18:55:01 +0200
pk wrote:
> Xmms, I believe it's called. And it's been working fine for quite a
> while (I've actually have never encountered a bug with Audacious), for
> me. Now, when I upgraded to 2.4.x dbus was forced on me (well, that
> and Xfce4)... I'm used to Audacious
On 2011-09-18 14:56, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> And he's using Audacious - a fork of a gigantic bug nest (mms) .
> According to his earlier post, it forces dbus to run.
Xmms, I believe it's called. And it's been working fine for quite a
while (I've actually have never encountered a bug with Audacious
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 9:37 AM, Volker Armin Hemmann
wrote:
> Am Sonntag 18 September 2011, 15:19:29 schrieb pk:
> again, if it you say 'it must be bad because there is a bug in it' you can
> disregard all software ever written.
This is why, when designing systems, you want as little complexity
Am Sonntag 18 September 2011, 15:19:29 schrieb pk:
> On 2011-09-18 14:32, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> > So you are going from a single bug to 'it must be evil'. If you do that
> > all the time there isn't much software left.
>
> You said: "I bet you can't even measure a
> difference between dbus
Am Sonntag 18 September 2011, 09:15:25 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
> On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 6:03 AM, Volker Armin Hemmann
>
> wrote:
> > Am Sonntag 18 September 2011, 11:23:43 schrieb pk:
> >> On 2011-09-18 09:37, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> >> > Other systems may start to use it if it proves itself
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 9:19 AM, pk wrote:
> On 2011-09-18 14:32, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
>
>> So you are going from a single bug to 'it must be evil'. If you do that all
>> the time there isn't much software left.
>
> You said: "I bet you can't even measure a
> difference between dbus running
On 2011-09-18 14:32, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> So you are going from a single bug to 'it must be evil'. If you do that all
> the time there isn't much software left.
You said: "I bet you can't even measure a
difference between dbus running and dbus not running in speed or
responsiveness of y
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 6:03 AM, Volker Armin Hemmann
wrote:
> Am Sonntag 18 September 2011, 11:23:43 schrieb pk:
>> On 2011-09-18 09:37, Alan McKinnon wrote:
>> > Other systems may start to use it if it proves itself useful. Lucky for
>> > us, it doesn't obsolete anything else, just adds function
On Sun, 18 Sep 2011 14:32:11 +0200
Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> Am Sonntag 18 September 2011, 12:44:04 schrieb pk:
> > On 2011-09-18 12:03, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> > > And what is your problem with dbus anyway? I bet you can't even
> > > measure a
> > > difference between dbus running and
Am Sonntag 18 September 2011, 12:44:04 schrieb pk:
> On 2011-09-18 12:03, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> > And what is your problem with dbus anyway? I bet you can't even measure
> > a
> > difference between dbus running and dbus not running in speed or
> > responsiveness of your gui.
>
> Not my sp
On 2011-09-18 12:03, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> And what is your problem with dbus anyway? I bet you can't even measure a
> difference between dbus running and dbus not running in speed or
> responsiveness of your gui.
Not my specific case(s) but a quick google gave this:
https://bugs.launch
Am Sonntag 18 September 2011, 11:23:43 schrieb pk:
> On 2011-09-18 09:37, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > Other systems may start to use it if it proves itself useful. Lucky for
> > us, it doesn't obsolete anything else, just adds functionality to what
> > is already there.
>
> Although, one thing which
On 2011-09-18 09:37, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> Other systems may start to use it if it proves itself useful. Lucky for
> us, it doesn't obsolete anything else, just adds functionality to what
> is already there.
Although, one thing which I find very annoying is that the things that
depend on it sta
41 matches
Mail list logo
