We, KDE SIG, are considering which backend should be default for Phonon in
Fedora. Seems like it's not easy to agree on final decision @ KDE SIG meetings,
we'd like to summarize what's the problem, some backends facts (please correct
me, comment, add, etc.) and we'd like to hear comments from outer KDE SIG
universe, from you, Fedora developers & users, too.
First question is which Phonon use - there are two actually - one is part of
Qt, one is part of KDE.
Upstream recommends building/packaging phonon from qt, and building/packaging
Some backends facts...
GStreamer backend facts:
* now default one in Fedora (F12, rawhide)
* GStreamer is Fedora's default multimedia framework
- better support from Fedora side? (PA, releases)
* Phonon backend not as mature as Xine one
- missing functionality
* Maybe more support from upstream developers in the future? 
* Nokia is upstream
Xine backend facts:
* default in F10 & F11
* recommended by sandsmark (upstream developer) and Amarok team
* Xine is not as well supported as GStreamer in Fedora
- but currently nearly bug free
* KDE is upstream
We prepared test plan but still we don't have any response from our users. For
some users Xine one works better, for others GStreamer backend works better.
Seems like it depends on sound HW, ALSA support, PA, engine, backend -> lots
So there are two questions:
1. which Phonon
2. which backend
fits better to Fedora...
Jaroslav & KDE SIG
I download the latest kvm-88 from
http://sourceforge.net/projects/kvm/files/ . But when i did /'make'/ its
failing for following error,
CC [M] /dl/kvm-88/kvm/kernel/x86/x86.o
In file included from /dl/kvm-88/kvm/kernel/x86/trace.h:355,
include/trace/define_trace.h:53:43: error: arch/x86/kvm/trace.h: No such
file or directory
make: *** [/dl/kvm-88/kvm/kernel/x86/x86.o] Error 1
make: *** [/dl/kvm-88/kvm/kernel/x86] Error 2
make: *** [_module_/dl/kvm-88/kvm/kernel] Error 2
make: *** [all] Error 2
make: *** [kvm-kmod] Error 2
I have AMD processor supported '/svm/'
Is this known error?
Le Mer 30 septembre 2009 16:35, Qianqian Fang a écrit :
> Jens Petersen wrote:
>> We have been looking at updating bitmap-fonts recently,
>> and noticed that it is still listed mandatory in the comps
>> @base-x group.
>> So I just wondered a couple of naive questions:
>> - does bitmap-fonts have to be installed by default?
>> - what actually needs it?
> anything before X may still need bitmap fonts, don't they?
The problem is, we have a lot of stuff installed by default in base-x because
something "may" use it (even though no one actually checked that was still the
IMHO default packages in default groups should have a clear user, or be
downgraded to optional.