Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 23, 2013
An "enum" for Python 3
An unexpected perf feature
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 16, 2013
A look at the PyPy 2.0 release
Small problem for Linux ? Sure. Big problem for Linux user? Of course.
Posted Jul 9, 2009 7:47 UTC (Thu) by boudewijn (subscriber, #14185)
Of course, we ran into trouble when we wanted to support sound. Qt's phonon uses GStreamer as a
backend and that's a mess. We came to the conclusion that we'd better use QSound, since the
alternative would have been to redistribute the right gstreamer with all plugins ourselves.
Something compiled against a platfrom gstreamer on one distribution will crash on all other
distributions (that we tried).
Posted Jul 9, 2009 12:52 UTC (Thu) by rfunk (subscriber, #4054)
I also thought that the whole point of Phonon was that you don't have to
deal with the underlying Gstreamer (or Xine or whatever) engine at all, so
that engine could be swapped out or upgraded at will, as long as your
Phonon can handle the varying engines. Thus the confusion from Gstreamer
people who thought (wrongly) that Phonon was intended to replace
Of course, if you have a Qt app rather than a KDE app, it would seem to
make sense to use Qsound rather than Phonon anyway.
Posted Jul 9, 2009 13:09 UTC (Thu) by johnflux (subscriber, #58833)
Posted Jul 9, 2009 13:33 UTC (Thu) by boudewijn (subscriber, #14185)
We'll have to try again with 4.5 -- 4.5 is in many ways a great series of releases with lots of fixes
and cool things.
Posted Jul 9, 2009 13:04 UTC (Thu) by marcH (subscriber, #57642)
If your goal is to distribute only one "universal" binary, you are right this is seldom possible. If on the other hand you start from source then it often just works or with only a minor effort.
Porting your source code from one Unix vendor to the other was generally much more difficult than from one Linux distribution to the other. Simply because Linux distributions share most of their underlying source code.
Minor effor for WHO?
Posted Jul 9, 2009 16:16 UTC (Thu) by khim (subscriber, #9252)
If your goal is to distribute only one "universal" binary, you
are right this is seldom possible.
Your goal is to give
something they can use.
If on the other hand you start from
source then it often just works or with only a minor
...if you know how to install stuff from source. I
surprised at first when I found few years ago that some of my friends who
work as admins don't know C and don't know how to compile programs from
source... but then - why should they? It's rarely needed and when it's the
only possibility - they can contact me and I'll help them (at first it was
for free, later when I've tried to say "enough is enough" they just offered
me to pay for my skills and now everyone is happy). If even admins can not
compile stuff from source - what chance do you think "Joe Average" will
Porting your source code from one Unix vendor to the other was
generally much more difficult than from one Linux distribution to the
other. Simply because Linux distributions share most of their underlying
Sure - this was the point in article. And
my point is that such effort is still required if you are talking
about programs for "normal users"... and there are more Linux distributions
then there were Unix vendors...
Posted Jul 16, 2009 16:08 UTC (Thu) by Wol (guest, #4433)
And the tools lilypond uses to do that are open-source...
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds