| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 82587 | 2007-09-01 13:15:00 | Linux..... amarok issues | personthingy (1670) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 586928 | 2007-09-01 13:15:00 | I returned to my old HDD, with debian etch on it. my original POS failed somewhat utterly, so there is a possibility of data corruption, however, so far the only issue i seem to have found is here in amarok land, which is a shame as this is the biggest use i have for this machine. Anyway here's the error when i try to start amarok with command line stuff. personthingy@POS:~$ amarok Amarok: [Loader] Starting amarokapp.. Amarok: [Loader] Don't run gdb, valgrind, etc. against this binary! Use amarokapp. Amarok: [Loader] Amarok is taking a long time to load! Perhaps something has gone wrong? personthingy@POS:~$ While this is going on, the slash screen comes up, and another window opens up titled "updating database". Then both disappear. so much for the music. This is one error message that really doesn't seem to make sense to me......... |
personthingy (1670) | ||
| 586929 | 2007-09-01 13:56:00 | Now I don't use any distro of Linux or really use command line based OS's but is that error message actually asking you if something is wrong?:lol: Thats the funniest error message I've seen in a long time:D:lol: |
beeswax34 (63) | ||
| 586930 | 2007-09-01 14:34:00 | Running KDE, as i do, i normally click an icon on my tray or start menu, and amarok just starts. Starting it using a command is not the norm, (for me) but a way of getting some kind of in formation as to why it isn't working. A firefox issue a few months back reported not being able to find a certain file it required, therefore giving me a not to subtle clue as to what i must fix.... The output on this one wasn't quite that helpful tho. :( |
personthingy (1670) | ||
| 586931 | 2007-09-01 20:55:00 | What happens when you type 'amarokapp'? Thats how I start mine (via konsole) if need be |
Myth (110) | ||
| 586932 | 2007-09-01 21:41:00 | A lot of links on google with this problem but no real answers. One I found was to try renaming .kde/share/apps/amarok/collection.db to .kde/share/apps/amarok/collection.db.old and then restart amarok |
Myth (110) | ||
| 586933 | 2007-09-01 21:53:00 | Yes well..... I can't remember what output "amarokapp" gave, other than i didn't find it useful at the time. I've just been through and deleted about 20 variations of the collection.db file that were created by rebuilding the collection during a failed start up, and low and behold, amarok can be persuaded to run again, with one slight change. It seems that storing my music on meinserver, and mounting the read only smb share as /music on POS and expecting amarok to be happy about this was not wise. After deleting the 20 variants of collection.db, and allowing amarok to build a new "collection" built from 2 mp3s on my desktop, things are a tad happier, apart from it being 2 mp3s on my desktop, which after a collection of several thousand does seem a tad lame. Now i just got to figure an effective way of networking my music collection so that amarok doesn't get upset. |
personthingy (1670) | ||
| 586934 | 2007-09-01 22:52:00 | . | personthingy (1670) | ||
| 586935 | 2007-09-01 22:58:00 | I have a gut feeling here that a big part of the problem lays in the ID3 tags, or whatever the equivalent part of the file may be. It seems that both networked MP3's and networked*.ogg's are equally neutered It seems that whatever i use to open the smb/read_only networked files, the ID3 tag fails to come through. I have a whole playlist running at the moment in juk that is not too usefully labeled as a series of blank lines in the playlist display. I'd noted that amarok was having to resort to displaying the actual file name on any networked files as well, BUT in both cases anything on local disk is dispalyed properly. I can see that atempting to sort out a "collection" of several thousand files all known as "unknown artist" and "unknown title" before starting up proper might just lead to an app sitting there and looking stupid before falling over for no good or obvious reason.:badpc: |
personthingy (1670) | ||
| 586936 | 2007-09-01 23:13:00 | Why not share it via NFS? SMB should be fine, it works without an issue for me? How are you mounting the shares? |
Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 586937 | 2007-09-01 23:22:00 | Why not share it via NFS? SMB should be fine, it works without an issue for me? How are you mounting the shares?Here's the relevant lines of fstab //192.168.0.1/Read_only /music smbfs user,username=% 0 0 //192.168.0.1/Open /open smbfs user,username=% 0 0 In both cases the files appear locally to be owned as root, which is something i'd rather avoid if i could. Property of personthingy would be much better! mmmmm NFS... perhaps that is what i should be doing. I only used samba as i wanted guest machines to be able to see the shared areas. Also i'm a NFS nuB.. :), but i suppose today is as goos as any a good day to learn a new trick or 2 :) |
personthingy (1670) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||