1 |
On Fri, 2006-02-24 at 08:22 +0100, Luca Barbato wrote: |
2 |
> George Prowse wrote: |
3 |
> > No, BPMx and Audacious are two different things |
4 |
> > |
5 |
> |
6 |
> bmpx is using large frameworks and have some deps that makes it in the |
7 |
> league of amarok totem and friends, call them large players |
8 |
> |
9 |
> bmp is in the league of zinf xmms audacious xmms2 (to a degree) and so |
10 |
> on, call them light players. |
11 |
> |
12 |
> Now, bmp is phased out, which is the gtk2 light player that could match |
13 |
> it's deps and features best? |
14 |
|
15 |
Ok, I guess I can have my try on explaining this once and for all :) |
16 |
|
17 |
BMP main authors started work on BMPx when BMP was around the 0.9.7 |
18 |
versions. |
19 |
BMP was not seeing any new features, and at one point was not maintained |
20 |
anymore, either. |
21 |
Audacious took BMP version 0.9.7.1 code, and worked on top of that, |
22 |
because BMP was unmaintained, and a couple other reasons that one can |
23 |
read from the Audacious FAQ. |
24 |
BMPx is pretty much a rewrite of the player, not having much inherited |
25 |
from XMMS code. |
26 |
|
27 |
So, if you want BMP, get Audacious - it is an advancement to the last |
28 |
released version of BMP. |
29 |
BMPx is a rewrite in progress for a more heavyweight player using lots |
30 |
of modern day tools and libraries (GTK+ 2.8+, cairo, gstreamer-0.10/xine |
31 |
probably SVG for skins soon if not already, etc). |
32 |
|
33 |
As a conclusion, if you used BMP for your lightweight player, you |
34 |
probably want audacious, if you don't want to try a more different |
35 |
thing. |
36 |
|
37 |
Hope this clears things up. |
38 |
|
39 |
-- |
40 |
With regards, |
41 |
Mart Raudsepp |
42 |
|
43 |
Project manager of wxMUD - http://wxmud.sourceforge.net/ |
44 |
Developer of wxWidgets - http://www.wxwidgets.org/ |
45 |
GTK+ port maintainer of OMGUI - http://www.omgui.org/ |
46 |
|
47 |
-- |
48 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |