digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Amarok2 Nightly Builds avaliable!

amarok.kde.org — " Neon makes it easy to follow development of Amarok by regularly providing packages for you to install. It is set up to be usable alongside your stable version. " Packages are available for (K)Ubuntu hardy, and will soon be ready for OpenSuSe.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Dongvid, on 05/06/2008, -13/+2Yes, Amarok2 is a KDE4 app. This is what you get for not being adventurous and installing the Kubuntu Hardy KDE4 REMIX.
    • nhnFreespirit, on 05/06/2008, -5/+17No. Amarok 2 will not run on Hardy's KDE4 remix as Amarok 2 requires the upcomming KDE 4.1. The point of Neon is to provide not only Amarok, but also pre built packages of the KDE 4.1 dependencies.
      • dualscreenman, on 05/06/2008, -1/+11This is incorrect. The amarok team has also built and made amarok-nightly depend the necessary KDE 4.1 packages that Amarok2 now uses. They are listed as amarok-nightly-qt and amarok-nightly-kde, etc. It's installing right now, but Amarok2 should run just fine right here on Kubuntu-KDE4 Hardy, as all the dependencies are taken care of. :)
        • nhnFreespirit, on 05/06/2008, -1/+15Ok, I admit that was poorly phrased by me. Amarok 2 will not build or run using the KDE 4.0.X libraries. It will however run in a KDE 4.0.X session if the KDE 4.1 dependencies ( provided by Neon ) are installed. So in essence we agree! the point I was trying to make was that really, it makes no difference if you run the KDE 3 or 4 version of Hardy as you will have to install the, Neon provided, KDE 4.1 dependencies either way.

          For the record, I am one of the Amarok hackers! .-)
        • dualscreenman, on 05/06/2008, -1/+8Ok, cool. :) Great job, you guys.
          I can see what you meant looking back on it now...
      • iRelinquish, on 05/06/2008, -8/+1ignorant. Dualscreenman is corrent
        • dualscreenman, on 05/06/2008, -1/+8We were both correct, we just misunderstood each other.
    • nmnnotmyname, on 05/06/2008, -6/+3Actually, If you're using Kubuntu instead of a better KDE OS, then you don't deserve it in the first place.
      The GNOME Ubuntu can run Amarok and Amarok 2 anyways, because you don't need to be in KDE to run apps from it.
  • sloppychris, on 05/06/2008, -12/+10I assume this works on Ubuntu Hardy as well? Probably needs all the KDE4 crap installed too. (ps- That conversation above......whooosh! over me)
    • wolf08, on 05/06/2008, -0/+11It does work on Ubuntu Hardy. And it doesn't need the kde stuff installed... sort of. There are a couple of amarok2 nightly packages, some of which download the necessary kde things. But, after installing it, you won't get a new choice upon login and all of kde isn't installed at all.
    • sloppychris, on 05/06/2008, -2/+10Thanks! In case my above comment was misconstrued, I didn't mean to be derogatory towards KDE if that's how it came across. Replace my use of the word "crap" with "dependencies" if necessary.
      • bratterscain, on 05/06/2008, -1/+7God damn it. Why digg him down people? Geez, nobody's going to want to use Linux if you take one misconstrued word that seems the least bit anti-linux and bury them for it. For *****'s sake.
        • nmnnotmyname, on 05/06/2008, -1/+3Because more than half the time it /is/ anti-Linux. (though I Dugg the comment.)
        • Derrekito, 4 hr 27 min ago, -0/+1Aren't we taking this whole comment thing a little too seriously? I'm kidding, I was about to bury him UNTIL I read the replies. :)
      • sloppychris, on 05/06/2008, -0/+4Thanks for the defense, but I understand why people might get the wrong idea just reading my first comment. And don't worry, I've been using and proselytizing linux for more than a year now.
    • AnimobileAWS, on 05/06/2008, -0/+4so which package should those of us on Ubuntu Hardy get?
      • Jaymoon, on 05/06/2008, -0/+5"To install it on Kubuntu Hardy add the following line to your /etc/apt/sources.list file:
        deb http://ppa.launchpad.net/project-neon/ubuntu hardy main
        check for updates, install amarok-nightly and enjoy."

        ...using the apt-get method installs everything you need...
    • Culyt, on 05/06/2008, -0/+4The brackets around the K in the description indicate its optional allowing for both KUbuntu and Ubuntu as options.
  • NikoK, on 05/06/2008, -4/+31Windows port please?!
    • ileftfark, on 05/06/2008, -2/+7If you're willing to download AndLinux, you can do it: http://url.ie/d4o

      But why not at least dual-boot?
    • shaherazad, on 05/06/2008, -2/+11Grow a pair!
    • zwaldowski, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2Amarok2 final (and at least alpha and beta) should be available on Windows. If you're feeling adventurous, you might want to try the KDE-Windows installer.
    • nmnnotmyname, on 05/06/2008, -0/+3There is a KDE4 port for Windows already, which includes amarok.
      The binaries are not up to date right now though.
    • sloppychris, on 05/06/2008, -0/+8I hope Amarok isn't ported until it's stable enough to symbolize the power of linux and open source to windows folk, similar to firefox.
      • nmnnotmyname, on 05/06/2008, -4/+1Way too late. Go try KDE4 for Windows. Luckily, most of the people who have tried it already know why it's unstable.
        • kleverness, on 05/06/2008, -0/+7You're wrong, no stable version of KDE4 for Windows has been released yet.
      • PotentChr0nic, on 05/06/2008, -1/+0Being user-friendly and pretty by default are obviously one of amarok's highlights but how is it more powerful than foobar2000?
  • Buu700, on 05/06/2008, -1/+10Earth!
  • xptweakerntn, on 05/06/2008, -0/+4So does anyone know when this is being planned on to be released?
  • Ricapar, on 05/06/2008, -0/+3Anyone have any screenshots?
  • moolcool, on 05/06/2008, -0/+6wasn't amarok2 supposed to have windows version?
    • zwaldowski, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2These are nightly builds specifically for Hardy.
    • Culyt, on 05/06/2008, -0/+6There is a Windows version, but no one is making binaries yet.
  • beowulflee, on 05/06/2008, -0/+7Nostalgic logo... I found that same blue wolf thing around six or seven years ago on some site that featured it as winning some icon contest for when I first started using AIM. I still have the original files.
    http://img238.imageshack.us/img238/647/128x128cs9. ...
  • Paleo, on 05/06/2008, -4/+3We woldu liek to ensurre everyboddy tat we DO knoow how ot spel avialable corektly !!!!
    • wolf08, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2Yeah, I feel like an idiot. Is there any way to correct it? I guess not. I've been tamed by the automatic spellcheck in firefox, but it doesn't work on single-line entries by default.
  • ptFoe, on 05/06/2008, -0/+14I have been saying this for sometime if you are developing a Linux app. and you need a large number of testers and exposure you need to have a Ubuntu repository. Ubuntu users aren't into this compiling *****.
    • nmnnotmyname, on 05/06/2008, -2/+5That's true, but it says a bad thing about Ubuntu Linux users. I hope they get more experience with Linux to learn how to do this after a while of using it - It's so well integrated with Linux you'd think it would be in the path of learning Linux, logically.
      • Marvelboy, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1I don't think you understand how difficult it was for me to even learn how to use a repository, sir.
    • Culyt, on 05/06/2008, -0/+3I had a go at getting Amarok2 running, the Amarok2/KDE4 build system was a mess and has its own way of doing things, you manually needed to setup the build enviroment and modify it to add amarok2 and some developer libs that weren't in kde4 core. I'm used to compiling stuff from source but couldn't figure it out. On top of that until the recent KDE4 release you would also need to compile that from source since there wasn't much in the way of packages that also included the dev libs.
      For simply testing development builds you shouldn't need to learn a whole new build system and dependency information.
      ☢
    • maninalift, on 05/06/2008, -1/+2OK I'm fairly new to owning a Linux system and yes it is Kubuntu (the distro shat shipped with my system). I have no problem with compiling and installing stuff but I just worry about having stuff installed that isn't in my apt database. As a noob it just feels safer to me if apt is keeping track of everything and keeping a record of what is installed - any advice for timid folks like me?
      • eclecticdave, on 05/06/2008, -0/+0Well I'm not sure about this one, but with simpler programs (which is to say ones with standard build systems and not too many dependancies) it's not that difficult to roll your own package using cdbs.
      • SteveMax, on 05/06/2008, -0/+3Use checkinstall instead of make install. That will create a .deb (or .rpm, or .tgz, or whatever your distro uses) file for you; you will be able to uninstall it through your package manager.
        • maninalift, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2Thanks. I didn't think I'd get such a pleasing answer.
    • Derrekito, 4 hr 29 min ago, -0/+1Indeed - it use to be alright, but now the scene changes so much more quickly than in the past. In conjunction to regular life I simply do not have the time to compile, then play around with dependencies. Why not just have a few people from the project compile it once or twice, then release it in a repository - just better IMO. Don't forget you can usually still install the src files with the compiled program.
  • jasutton, on 05/06/2008, -0/+3If anyone is having problems running this on KDE 3 and Kubuntu, you'll need to install "dbus-x11" and then launch the program by running "dbus-launch amarok-nightly"

    Even though the app launches and plays music, it's nothing much to look at. It's missing icons and the prefs dialog is completely messed up. It fairs slightly better in KDE4, however.
  • cjnkns, on 05/06/2008, -7/+4KDE and more specifically KDE4 is just way to buggy for my taste.
    I have had more window crash alerts on KDE than I have with Windows. Imagine that - I didn't think it was possible.
    I love you Gnome!
    • oobuntu, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1i guess you were running KDE+compiz ? Doesn't seem to play well together. otherwise kde is fine.
    • nmnnotmyname, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1KDE4 is a little buggy, but KDE3 and Compiz on my box runs awesome.
  • diggerpleez, on 05/06/2008, -0/+561% [1 amarok-nightly-qt 89232393/93.1MB 96%] 343kB/s 33s

    come on baby!
    • maninalift, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1It's 10X the size of Amarok1.4
      • diggerpleez, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1After running it I see why. They have added 90% more fail.

        ... yeah I know. BER, but pretty useless in its current state. Hopefully a few weeks in peoples' hands will do wonders.
  • Vigacmoe, on 05/06/2008, -0/+3I am desperately looking for linux alternatives for foobar2000, Amarok2 is not an option because it's way too heavy, there are so many useless features (for me). Programs like Rhythmbox/Banshee have the same problem. Any suggestions?
  • hellotyler, on 05/06/2008, -9/+2No Os x Build. No digg.
    • nhnFreespirit, on 05/06/2008, -0/+6Ah come on, have a heart! :-)

      Amarok 2 does run on OS X, we just have not gotten around to actually building distributable binaries for it yet...
  • ninja0, on 05/06/2008, -0/+5What if I don't use *buntu? I use gentoo, gimme the source please.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.