Re: [Rhythmbox-devel] DACP (iTunes remote) support added

On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 9:44 AM, Peter
<rhythmbox-devel maubp freeserve co uk> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 12:59 AM, Jonathan Matthew <jonathan d14n org> wrote:
>> Sounds like you don't have a new enough version of libsoup. You need
>> libsoup 2.32.x for it to work.
> Wow - that's very new! Even Debian experimental only has 2.31.2 for now:
> I've just installed the latest version from their git repository instead (and
> likewise the totem playlist parser and libdmapsharing also from git) and
> now the latest RB from git seems to pair up and basic remote control is
> working.
> Does this version dependency need to be checked in the RB configure script?

libdmapsharing should probably complain if libsoup isn't new enough
for DACP to work. It's not really up to an application to check
versions of libraries required for other libraries to work.

> Problems or missing features so far:
> * Pairing is pretty slick - nicely done. Is it possible to give the pin code
> focus automatically though? I click on the remote but typing shows some
> funny little box at the bottom of the screen...

Yes, that seems like a good idea. One way to do this would be to
override the impl_activate method in rb-dacp-source.c. This is called
when the user selects the source from the source list.

The funny little box you're seeing is the type-ahead search box for
the source list, by the way.

> * No artwork sent to iPod, although RB seems to understand the request
> the log claims "No artwork for currently playing song" (which is wrong).

It shouldn't be hard to implement this. If you're interested in
working on it, take a look at how the status icon plugin deals with
cover art images.

> I'm not promising anything, but would patches via a public
> git repository be welcome (I'm thinking github), or would you
> like patches via bug reports?

Generally I prefer dealing with patches in bugzilla, but if you wanted
to point to a branch in a public git repo instead of attaching
patches, that could possibly work too.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]