Please read this before reporting a bug:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines
Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.
REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines
Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.
REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
FS#7502 - VLC needs libcdio.so.6
Attached to Project:
Arch Linux
Opened by Anonymous (abelstern) - Sunday, 24 June 2007, 02:03 GMT
Last edited by Jan de Groot (JGC) - Sunday, 24 June 2007, 19:41 GMT
Opened by Anonymous (abelstern) - Sunday, 24 June 2007, 02:03 GMT
Last edited by Jan de Groot (JGC) - Sunday, 24 June 2007, 19:41 GMT
|
DetailsVLC complains about not being able to load the wxWidgets plugin,
[00000283] skins2 interface error: no suitable dialogs provider found (hint: compile the wxWidgets plugin, and make sure it is loaded properly) but after some searching I found out it wants to open /usr/lib/libcdio.so.6 which doesn't exist due to libcdio being at version 0.78 already. Indeed symlinking fixes the issue. VLC version: extra/vlc 0.8.6b-1 libcdio version: extra/libcdio 0.78.2-1 Steps to reproduce: -install vlc -run VLC -the skins2 interface is loaded and no dialogs work (they use the wxWidgets plugin), and VLC complains: [00000283] skins2 interface error: no suitable dialogs provider found (hint: compile the wxWidgets plugin, and make sure it is loaded properly) |
This task depends upon
Closed by Jan de Groot (JGC)
Sunday, 24 June 2007, 19:41 GMT
Reason for closing: Fixed
Additional comments about closing: vlc moved from testing to extra, which was compiled against this version of libcdio.
Sunday, 24 June 2007, 19:41 GMT
Reason for closing: Fixed
Additional comments about closing: vlc moved from testing to extra, which was compiled against this version of libcdio.
Comment by Andreas Radke (AndyRTR) -
Sunday, 24 June 2007, 10:59 GMT
i686 or x86_64?
Comment by Anonymous (abelstern) -
Sunday, 24 June 2007, 11:04 GMT
i686