Re: Almost everyday a new issue: this time Amarok
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 09:41:06PM +0100, AG wrote:
> On 19/06/11 20:05, Freeman wrote:
> >On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 07:01:07PM +0100, AG wrote:
> >>On 19/06/11 17:41, lee wrote:
> >>>AG<computing.account@googlemail.com> writes:
> >>>
> >>>>Hey list
> >>>>
> >>>>Today a new issue reared its ugly head. I installed, using
> >>>>safe-update from the Update Manager in GNOME, on a wheezy
> >>>>installation, Amarok .
> >>>>
> >>>>When I go to run Amarok, it crashes. This is the output:
> >>>>[...]
> >>>>this ... any ideas?
> >>>How about purging amarok, removing all configuration files that may be
> >>>left in your home directory and install it with aptitude?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>Hi Lee
> >>
> >>Did that and the Amrok app still crashes.
> >>
> >1.) testing = TESTING
> >
> >If the only problem in testing right now is applications, that is a
> >good thing. During the squeeze testing cycle I was without adequate video
> >for 6 months and would have been for most of the cycle had I not held on to
> >old drivers for a year. And I had sound issues the lasted half of the cycle
> >too.
> >
>
> & you accepted that as okay?
>
Did for years. When I wanted something more stable--and would have been
willing to complain about it--I went to, of all things, stable, where I've
had no complaints.
Debian is *free* monetarily, along with other open source software. But
there is a price: your time, effort and positive contribution. (Not to
mention the time, effort and positive contribution of open source developers
who sincerely want nothing but to succeed in *giving* you advanced
software.) That price is magnified exponentially by moving outside of Debian
stable.
> Testing is one thing, but unless our Sid/ experimental colleagues
> are really putting up with some dire situations regarding upstream
> applications, then why would testing be subjected to passed along
> configurations that aren't fit for purpose?
>
The Debian assurances are associated with the stable release. Stable is the
only official release. One purpose of testing is to get bug reports from
the general usage at large, which can't be duplicated anywhere else.
I am sure that developers strive for certain standards in the testing
release. But better to fail them in testing than in stable. I have heard
rumors that development schedules sometimes force packages into testing when
they will be broken or constitute problem because there simply is no other
solution.
That happened to fglrx and my video card. There simply wasn't a replacement
and Debian development had to move forward, eventually breaking my old
version of fglrx, in order to, among other things, develop the replacement.
It is easy and maybe fun to sit in judgement. It is much harder to make a
complicated system in a complicated world perfect, not to mention *free*.
And Debian does something like that.
> >2.) Amarok 2 is under heavy development right now.
> >
> >The version number may look high enough but the code is a complete rewrite.
>
> In which case, it shouldn't be passed along until such time as the
> relevant dependencies are fixed.
You are welcome to the stable version and I am pretty sure that the
1.4-something version previously mentioned as rock solid will run on stable,
maybe testing. You are also welcome to educate yourself on the general
status and issues of all the *free* open-source software there is to choose
from. There is *free* documentation (not anticipating a profitable sale) to
make choosing as easy as possible. But the work involved will never be
completely taken out of the equation, even by all those hard working
volunteers and developers donating their time and resources, unless you pay
somebody.
> >3.) Amarok is from KDE, Banshee is the official Gnome music suite.
> >
> >For Amarok, make sure all the KDE dependencies are installed.
>
> It used to work until the latest round of "safe" upgrades.
>
I've always understood "safe" in this case to mean that you will be left
with a bootable computer, not that there is a guarantee against application
breakage. Might be worth reading the docs if it is an issue for you. I
haven't since it isn't for me.
> >4.) There are a lot of lib dependency upgrades between 2.3.1 and 2.4.1,
> >looks like most in fact.
>
> In which case I would have expected a mature package manager like
> apt-get or aptitude to compensate for, which is part of what they
> are intended to do.
Even in stable, I use apt-move to archive the old version of everything I
upgrade. I mean really, find the perfect combination of OS, apps, hardware
and user. If you do you should archive everything immediately and then bet
the lottery. If you don't you should still archive against backslide.
Ergo, snapshot.debian.org, if you don't want to do it yourself.
> >5.) There is an amarok mailing list, amarok@kde.org, where the developers
> >themselves will respond to your queries directly, given time.
>
> Have already written to them ... and response time is slow, and who
> is to say if this is an Amarok or a Debian issue? Hence the double
> posting, which I know is not good protocol.
Amarok is having a phase like that but you are in testing so there is no
assurance from Debian. Amarok is good at responding. If you are Royalty,
or have control of nuclear arms, you might try adding that to your post.
I was thinking of making a donation and announcing that on the Amarok list.
I had just thought of the announcement to encourage others. I like the
program and appreciate their efforts. But I guess it might garnish quicker
responses if the donation were substantial enough.
> >6.) I solved my problems trying to keep the latest version of Amarok by
> >installing from squeeze-backports. This might still work for wheezy and
> >there is a chance it will resolve the issue if it is dependency related.
> >
>
> How would I do that? I have tried to install from
> /var/cache/apt/archives/ but that doesn't give me an alternate
> version
>
http://backports-master.debian.org/Instructions/
--
Regards,
Freeman
"Microsoft is not the answer. Microsoft is the question. NO (or Linux) is the
answer." --Somebody
Reply to: