Bug 311650 - VLC player configuration is ignored
Summary: VLC player configuration is ignored
Status: RESOLVED NOT A BUG
Alias: None
Product: phonon-backend-vlc
Classification: Frameworks and Libraries
Component: general (show other bugs)
Version: 0.6
Platform: openSUSE Linux
: NOR normal
Target Milestone: 0.7
Assignee: Harald Sitter
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2012-12-13 19:08 UTC by Dainius Masiliūnas
Modified: 2012-12-14 16:40 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In:
Sentry Crash Report:

Attachments
Add an attachment

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Dainius Masiliūnas 2012-12-13 19:08:11 UTC 
At least some changes done to the VLC player configuration are not propagated to Phonon. In my case, I tried to change the FluidSynth MIDI soundfont from the default FluidR3 to a custom one, and while the VLC player does acknowledge the change, the Phonon VLC backend does not, it keeps using the default settings.

Nothing changes if I create a ~/.config/Phonon/vlc.conf file (by copying ~/.config/vlc/vlcrc).

I would also test other settings, but unfortunately I can't find a good setting to test right now.
Comment 1 Myriam Schweingruber 2012-12-13 22:01:53 UTC 
Well, the VLC application is totally independent of the phonon-backend-vlc, the backend uses the libvlc library, not the player or its settings. So don't be astonished if one does not propagate to the other :)
Comment 2 Dainius Masiliūnas 2012-12-13 22:13:51 UTC 
That's fair enough, but the matter is that there still should be some place to configure the backend. As it is, it just runs on defaults, which is obviously not always ideal. But then I suppose I would have to open an enhancement instead?
Comment 3 Myriam Schweingruber 2012-12-14 16:07:44 UTC 
(In reply to comment #2)
> That's fair enough, but the matter is that there still should be some place
> to configure the backend. As it is, it just runs on defaults, which is
> obviously not always ideal. But then I suppose I would have to open an
> enhancement instead?

Yes that should be a feature request.