You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
NCMPCPP has been telling me that my playlist is too large whenever I try and add my music library. I looked through the wiki but I don't see anything related to this error on it. It used to add my entire directory without this sort of complaining, but it's since stopped after some permissions got changed in my home folder. (I don't think that's related, but it's worth mentioning as it happened the same time this started). I'm not sure what to do and scratching the internet hasn't yielded much to get around this. Can someone help me get this set back to normal behavior/what should I do?
Last edited by scatherinch (Yesterday 23:18:19)
Offline
A literal google search for your exact title gives a gemini response mentioning two config keys to set this, namely max_playlist_length and max_command_list_size. If your collection didn't grow unexpectedly it's very likely that "some permissions got changed" may prevent the config from being read properly and a potentially adjusted value not being looked at which sets the default value to 16384.
So what "some permissions changed" happened exactly?
ls -lR $HOME/.config/mpd #or wherever your actual configuration is supposed to lieAlso dumping an entire music library into the playlist is probably not really the envisioned way of doing this, look into things like https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/ashuffle if you want to shuffle through your whole library without loading everything into the playlist.
Last edited by V1del (Yesterday 20:19:47)
Offline
Originally, I did try adding that Into the configuration file. I do believe I have more music than I should, I did add some circa a few days before this. Is there a specific area in the config file I should add those lines to make it work?
Also, Yes: well, I'm a student, I've been trying to learn Linux more in depth and Arch definitely has a higher curve to it going from more user-friendly distros. I was studying how permissions actually worked and ran the wrong command at the wrong place, resulting in a broken home folder (noob mistake...yeah...). I believe the command was chmod 0700 (owner can read, write, execute, but group and world can't?).
Not surprisingly, all sorts of other problems began appearing because of this and I'm not sure how to get the home folder back to the state it was before without just reinstalling the system from scratch, which I really don't want to do.
Last edited by scatherinch (Yesterday 21:14:09)
Offline
It shouldn't matter where, simply a single line with the wanted size number: https://mpd.readthedocs.io/en/stable/us … imitations
You really should fix your home dir perms, this will likely be the least of your problems if you indeed ran what you claim to have ran. Did you do this recursively? What output do you get from
sudo ls -al $HOME #Redact embarassing filenames, but leave the perms and the ownership info intactOffline
Yes, it was recursively. ( sudo chmod -R 0700 /home/<username> )
edited output:
drwx------ 36 user user 4096 Feb 3 15:26 .
drwxr-xr-x 3 user user 4096 Aug 17 2024 ..
-rwx------ 1 user user 140 Feb 3 14:29 .bash_history
-rwx------ 1 user user 21 Aug 1 2024 .bash_logout
-rwx------ 1 user user 57 Feb 2 2023 .bash_profile
-rwx------ 1 user user 181 Feb 2 09:02 .bashrc
drwx------ 20 user user 4096 Feb 3 15:13 .cache
drwx------ 71 user user 4096 Feb 3 16:32 .config
drwx------ 2 user user 4096 Feb 3 04:25 Desktop
-rwx------ 1 user user 5616 Feb 2 09:14 .dircolors
drwx------ 6 user user 4096 Feb 3 04:06 Documents
drwx------ 2 user user 4096 Jun 5 2024 .dosbox
drwx------ 3 user user 4096 Jan 21 2025 .dotnet
drwx------ 2 user user 36864 Feb 3 02:21 Downloads
-rwx--x--x 1 user user 68 May 31 2025 redacted executable
drwx------ 10 user user 4096 Jul 29 2025 redacted
drwx------ 2 user user 4096 Jan 18 17:57 .fontconfig
drwx------ 2 user user 4096 Jan 12 06:44 .fonts
drwx------ 5 user user 4096 Feb 29 2024 .gnupg
-rwx------ 1 user user 577 Jun 8 2025 .gtkrc-2.0
drwx------ 5 user user 4096 Jun 8 2025 .icons
drwx------ 2 user user 4096 Jan 12 2025 redactted
-rwx------ 1 user user 429 Nov 9 18:28 .imwheelrc
drwx------ 5 user user 4096 Aug 17 2024 .local
-rwx--x--x 1 user user 47 Apr 4 2024 redacted
drwx------ 12 user user 4096 Jan 17 2025 redacted
drwx------ 3 user user 4096 Aug 17 2024 .mono
drwx------ 3 user user 4096 Sep 21 2024 redacted
drwx------ 2 user user 4096 Nov 22 17:08 Music
drwx------ 2 user user 4096 Feb 3 14:33 Pictures
drwx------ 3 user user 4096 Feb 3 04:26 .pki
-rwx--x--x 1 user user 65598656 Oct 15 15:37 redacted executable
drwx------ 2 user user 4096 Feb 3 00:44 Public
-rwx------ 1 user user 726 Jan 29 21:46 redacted
drwx------ 5 user user 4096 Aug 17 2024 redacted
drwx------ 2 user user 4096 Aug 19 2024 RMG
drwx------ 3 user user 4096 Feb 3 14:29 .ssh
drwx------ 2 user user 4096 Feb 3 04:27 .steam
lrwxrwxrwx 1 user user 31 Feb 3 04:27 redacted symlink
lrwxrwxrwx 1 user user 29 Feb 3 04:27 redacted symlink
-rwx--x--x 1 user user 359 Aug 17 2024 redacted executable
drwx------ 2 user user 4096 Oct 13 17:42 Templates
drwx------ 4 user user 4096 Sep 21 2024 redacted
drwx------ 2 user user 4096 Feb 3 01:07 redacted
drwx------ 9 user user 4096 Dec 8 2024 redacted
-rwx--x--x 1 user user 373 Aug 8 2024 redacted executable
drwx------ 3 user user 4096 Feb 29 2024 .var
drwx------ 2 user user 4096 Jul 21 2025 Videos
-rwx------ 1 user user 1225 Apr 9 2025 .viminfo
drwx------ 3 user user 4096 Feb 29 2024 redacted
drwx------ 5 user user 4096 Feb 3 04:14 .wine
-rwx--x--x 1 user user 357 Aug 8 2024 redacted executable
-rwx------ 1 user user 56 Feb 3 14:58 .Xauthority
-rwx------ 1 user user 224 Apr 4 2024 .xbindkeysrc
-rwx------ 1 user user 250 Jul 9 2024 .xinitrc
drwx------ 16 user user 4096 Jan 26 11:31 redacted
-rwx------ 1 user user 259 Jul 9 2024 .xprofile
-rwx------ 1 user user 116 Jun 25 2024 .yarnrcedit: also it's news to me that program has a limitation to how much content it can display, i really didn't know...i definitely have more than 16,384 songs
edit: i was told that 0700 should be for hardening and security reasons, but i guess that's not good?
Last edited by scatherinch (Yesterday 22:02:27)
Offline
i was told that 0700 should be for hardening and security reasons, but i guess that's not good?
No. More like idiotic.
"go-rwx" is mostly* reasonable but setting random files executable (don't run u-x now…) is hardly making things secure.
* what's the euid of your mpd process?
ps aux | grep mpdit's news to me that program has a limitation to how much content it can display
These settings are various limitations to prevent MPD from using too many resources (denial of service).
It's not so much the display part.
Tbc, you indeed have and want a playlist > 16k songs?
Why??
Offline
No. More like idiotic.
"go-rwx" is mostly* reasonable but setting random files executable (don't run u-x now…) is hardly making things secure.Those 'executables' are honestly just shell files that I made to launch utilities like maim and the occasional game from my window manager's command line, none of them are foreign programs
So then should I run sudo chmod -R go-rwx then? Admittedly, I never understood the symbolic method of setting the permissions as opposed to the octal way. to my defense, that's how I was taught.
* what's the euid of your mpd process?user 1955 0.1 0.1 1041680 67972 ? Ssl 14:58 0:12 mpd
user 738445 0.0 0.0 7540 4196 pts/2 S+ 17:32 0:00 grep --color=auto mpd
Tbc, you indeed have and want a playlist > 16k songs?
Why??My window manager's configuration has a built-in feature linked to mpd that allows me to glide through tracks and change them using hotkeys, thus, it feels incomplete due to this limitation and i know it's not going to play all of the music when i do this
edit: but just curiosity - go-rwx - g(group)o(others)-r(read)w(write)x(execute)?Last edited by scatherinch (Yesterday 22:53:18)
Offline
So then should I run sudo chmod -R go-rwx then?
No. Running "chmod -R" is rarely a good idea and you should never sudo it
Those executables are honestly just shell files
You turned all sorts of files executable.
I never quite understood the symbolic method of setting the permissions
The main aspect is to reasonably *adjust* permissions, rather than flattening them.
mpd seems to run under your user, did you fix the mpd.conf, restart mpd and do you then still encounter the error?
My window manager has a built-in feature linked to mpd that allows me to glide through tracks and change them using hotkeys
1. why are you then using ncmpcpp
2. you mean it requires something like "mpc listall"?
Having an mpc playlist that's just a copy of the mpd database sounds clumsy…
Offline
No. Running "chmod -R" is rarely a good idea and you should never sudo it
You turned all sorts of files executable.What would you recommend I do then? I'd like to put everything back to the way I had it when I first spawned the home user.
mpd seems to run under your user, did you fix the mpd.conf, restart mpd and do you then still encounter the error?Yeah, but like the first responder said, it's just not possible to display so many entries and I did add those lines from the documentation and now that I understand what's going on, that in fact it has nothing to do with ncmpcpp and this is about permissions, I'll just change the thread topic
1. why are you then using ncmpcpp
2. you mean it requires something like "mpc listall"?
Having an mpc playlist that's just a copy of the mpd database sounds clumsy…No, I don't suppose I need it, it was just very minimalistic and I liked the aesthetic. I ran it in a different tab and browsed through the music inside of it using my mouse. I could just use a different music player like audacious or something (I understand now that it has nothing to do with MPD)
Offline
What would you recommend I do then? I'd like to put everything back to the way I had it when I first spawned the home user.
Do you have a snapshot or backup from before you changed the permissions? Otherwise you could create a new user, run all commands that create configs in that users home directory then compare permissions. Or you attempt to determine what needs to be executable and remove it from all other files.
Edit:
Note you can set umask 0077 which would create files with 0600 and directories 0700. Of course executables can change their own umask and it only applies to new files but it is much safer than recursive `chmod`.
Last edited by loqs (Today 01:33:06)
Offline
Pages: 1