Bug#920978: audacious: It would be great is the qt5 ui from audacios was also put into the deb package
Followup-For: Bug #920978
Package: audacious
Version: 3.10.1-1
Dear Maintainer,
I'm also very interested in Qt5 UI. There's a bug #820472, where someone
argued that
"GTK player should not depend on Qt stuff". But in fact, audacious is
*"multifrontend"*
player nowadays, and Qt UI is superior in some aspects. E.g. it has better,
more natural search bar, that filters out entries that do not match,
leaving only those
that do, making it more keyboard-friendly; It also has window docking
capabilities, so
I don't have to waste time unminimizing and realigning
AlbumArt/LyricWiki windows as they
are tied to a player window. Not to say it just looks prettier on
KDE-based desktops.
So I think a few more qt dependencies is not a big price to make both
GTK/Qt users happy,
considering persistent storage capacities we have nowadays. And it
should not require
much effort to enable it, as this was already done in `stretch` release.
Regards, Mikhail.
P.S. I had some issues with `reportbug` so this email is sent via
thunderbird instead.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 10.0
APT prefers stable
APT policy: (990, 'stable'), (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 'oldstable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386
Kernel: Linux 4.19.0-5-amd64 (SMP w/8 CPU cores)
Kernel taint flags: TAINT_PROPRIETARY_MODULE, TAINT_OOT_MODULE,
TAINT_UNSIGNED_MODULE
Locale: LANG=en_AU.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_AU.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8),
LANGUAGE=en_AU:en (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
LSM: AppArmor: enabled
Versions of packages audacious depends on:
ii audacious-plugins 3.10.1-1
ii dbus 1.12.16-1
ii dbus-user-session [default-dbus-session-bus] 1.12.16-1
ii gtk2-engines-pixbuf 2.24.32-3
ii libaudcore5 3.10.1-1
ii libc6 2.28-10
ii libgcc1 1:8.3.0-6
ii libglib2.0-0 2.58.3-2
ii libstdc++6 8.3.0-6
Versions of packages audacious recommends:
ii unzip 6.0-23
audacious suggests no packages.
-- no debconf information
Reply to: