> Though it could be that you haven't installed any capable
> applications that inform Gnome that they're available as a CDDA handler.
What's the "capable application"?
One that's capable of playing CDs, as opposed to one that isn't.
Why isn't the capable application included?
That, I cannot answer, for numerous reasons. One being we don't know
how you did the install. Whether you customised it, or went with the
defaults. For all we know, you could have deliberately not installed
something, and that something might have been what was needed.
> When I've used XMMS, in the past,
Yup, in the past, you too? We're in the present, you know?
I haven't installed the latest OS, yet. And with my current OS, it was
so long ago that I don't recall whether I added XMMS along with extra
stuff, or just added the basic package.
But it seems RhythmBox is aware of this <B>big
problem</B> most modern
computers have and it just works without roaming the net to fix it.
Tales I've read suggests that RhythmBox doesn't "just work." For
people it doesn't, as can be said for many other programs.
Don't you think they take more care than XMMS developers to get
I can't answer for them. But some programs are geared more towards one
thing (e.g. playing oggs and mp3s) than other things (playing CDs). It
depends on what the creators wanted to do with their program.
The page I read dates back to 2005 and the problem is still
There are reasons to do things differently. For some users, such as
ones without megafast PCs, getting the CD drive to do the actual playing
is better than having the computer do it. Plus, you *may* get hardware
error correction in the drive, and spinning a CD at the normal CD spin
rate is much quieter than the computer spinning the disc at full speed
to decode the data.
Honestly, unless the devil himself is at the helm of RhythmBox,
fooling around and go for it. I didn't experience a single problem and
never had to roam the net to get it working.
I've had RhythmBox give me sheer hell, at times.
How come there's nobody at Red Hat/Fedora
<B>responsible</B> for making
reports about this and having things fixed. Playing Jobs, in other words?
You know, kinda: "Will you get this fixed or should we use Thunar... and
XFCE? Will you get XMMS working or will we use RhythmBox? Will you get
Brasero working or... Cause, in the end, you see, everything will work.
You don't work, you're not there."
This project works differently than Apple Computers.
I don't believe XMMS is a default, any more. For my last Fedora
install, I'm sure I had to add it, myself. Personally, I prefer it to
some alternatives, it's less CPU intensive to run.
It's a pity to see how we're going nowhere fast, declining
responsibilities by telling the newbies to RTFM!
That depends where the manual is. I think that telling someone to RTFM
is actually a good starting answer, certainly when there's a good one.
Read the damn manual, before you do your nut about something.
But here, all you receive as an answer is "File a bug
report". Hey, wait a
sec! Doesn't anybody at Fedora use Fedora? How come nobody never noticed
that Brasero doesn't work or XMMS is a pain? Why should we be writing all
the time when, apparently, nobody gives a shit?
a. Fedora Project is different than Apple Computers.
b. We, the community run it, more than some head office.
c. No one person will have tried every single application in the distro.
d. Stop being silly.
> Most common answer: What doesn't work for you, is working
for them, so
> they cannot fix your particular problem.
Na. As you explained, XMMS doesn't play well with modern hardware
been this way for years.
Actually, I find XMMS does.
In short, for my problems:
1) Scrap XMMS, install RhythmBox
Last time I looked, I'm sure XMMS wasn't installed by default, and
2) Scrap Totem, install Mplayer with all the plug-ins
Yes, Totem sucks. Even for the codecs that it does support, from the
get-go, it's a CPU pig.
Mplayer's quite good, but I've seen GUIfied versions of it that was just
plain horrible. And you'll find plenty of people will stick the knife
into mplayer for reasons why *they* don't like it, compared to something
3) Scrap Brasero, install K3B
Personally, I'm against installing any KDE applications when you don't
actually use KDE. K3B should be an installation choice when you want a
I have to say that I'm far from impressed by any of the burning
applications that I've tried out, and that'd be at least half a dozen,
by now. I tend to use the basic /burn a disc with these files/ feature
that Nautilus has for simple CD/DVD burning, and command line burning
utilities when I need something special.
4) Scrap Nautilus, install Thunar (For the URL bar, but when I went
/dev/sr0, I was asked which application I wanted to open said file. I of
course entered rhythmbox, and it worked! Not much use, of course, since I
only have to right click the CD icon to open rhythmbox.)
I don't particularly like Nautilus, but for other reasons. It's only a
basic file browser, it's not a file manager (it's too simplistic for
I tried Thunar quite some time ago, didn't like that, either.
For a basic workhorse file manager, I don't mind emelfm2, too much. It
has basic file filtering, etc., that make using GUIfied file listers
useful for sorting through large muddled messes of files. And it's
relatively easy for users to configure what choices you get for
double-clicking and right-clicking on particular file types. And not
showing ANY icons for files, at all, makes it a lot faster for dealing
with large file collections.
5) Scrap Glipper, install Klipper, though Klipper has bugs in GNOME.
might give Clipman another try.
There are places to discuss what forms default installations. If you
have good reasons to suggest things should or shouldn't be installed,
then debate them appropriately.
Though, as I mentioned earlier, putting KDE things into a Gnome system,
isn't a great idea, and you'll find those deciding basic/default package
lists will say the same thing. For a Gnome desktop, the defaults will
be Gnome or generic applications, likewise for KDE desktop installs.
I have yet to configure Firefox in about:config so that one click in
url window selects everything. I hope it's still possible. With the
precedent version I had, clicking the icon to the left would do the job.
Not anymore. Those bastards like to make you sweat with every new release!
To each their own... I prefer one click to put a cursor where I click,
so I can correct some mistake / modify something. Something else to do
something other than put the cursor where I click the mouse (the default
behaviour for almost all mouse clicking in a typeable area), seems a
more sensible default.
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.