Page 1 of 1
UMPlayer
Posted:
Mon Apr 04, 2011 1:48 pm
by loonyphoenix
There is an SMPlayer fork, UMPlayer:
http://www.umplayer.com/I wonder if SMPlayer can borrow some of the new features from it. Personally, I like some of their skins.
Re: UMPlayer
Posted:
Tue Apr 05, 2011 10:54 am
by BlCa`
I'd rather not see smplayer plagued with useless features and becoming bloated because of it.
Re: UMPlayer
Posted:
Tue Apr 05, 2011 10:55 am
by rvm
It looks interesting, but I can't compile it with Qt 4.3.4. I guess it requires one of the latest versions of Qt.
It fails to compile with Qt 4.5.1 too.
Re: UMPlayer
Posted:
Tue Apr 05, 2011 4:11 pm
by wantilles
Re: UMPlayer
Posted:
Tue Apr 05, 2011 5:28 pm
by loonyphoenix
Re: UMPlayer
Posted:
Thu Apr 07, 2011 1:05 pm
by wantilles
Re: UMPlayer
Posted:
Thu Apr 07, 2011 7:22 pm
by Surkow
It would be nice if the developers didn't simply fork SMPlayer but also contributed patches upstream.
Re: UMPlayer
Posted:
Thu Apr 07, 2011 10:24 pm
by rvm
Re: UMPlayer
Posted:
Fri Apr 08, 2011 12:40 pm
by redxii
Dependencies are not as big a deal when compiled for Windows... the dlls for Qt are included with SMPlayer and only affect SMPlayer. I have quite a few other programs commercial and open that also use Qt but they use their own Qt dlls as well.
Linux is a whole other issue, though. I understand where RVM is coming from, I've used Linux and libraries are a constant moving target, and frankly having to compile anything in Linux is a big pain in the ass and the ever updating libraries break compatibility with older programs that aren't compiled against the new libraries.
Re: UMPlayer
Posted:
Sat Apr 09, 2011 9:11 am
by wantilles
That happens only if you use static distros like Ubuntu (I'm guessing that that's what you're using).
On the other hand, there are some serious distros out there, that are rolling-release, continuously updating, like Archlinux, for example.