Gnome Baker

azwethinkweiz · 2007-05-23 19:13:49

Since switching over to Duke from Voodoo, I can't get gnome baker to work. It begins to write the disc but it crashes before it finishes. I'm wondering if anyone else is having problems with gnome baker with Duke. Or if anyone has any suggestions as to what the problem might be

Last edited by azwethinkweiz (2007-05-23 19:14:10)

phrakture · 2007-05-23 19:46:31

Hmmm gnomebaker is kind of no longer developed... well, it is, but it's slow - most people recommend brasero, and we (I) might replace gnomebaker with it at some point in the future - does brasero work fine?

azwethinkweiz · 2007-05-23 20:14:32

You win! Brasero works great. Not only that but it writes faster than Gnomebaker, and I like the interface alot more...youre my new hero HA...thanks man

hussam · 2007-05-23 20:17:50

phrakture, brasero works much better than gnomebaker if you compile it without libburn support.

.:B:. · 2007-05-23 22:03:08

Brasero is awesome. Great interface, and it might not be better than K3b feature-wise, but it's certainly a lot easier (and more pleasant) to use.

phrakture · 2007-05-23 22:30:00

My big dilemma is whether or not to drop gnomebaker from the repos, or at least to unsupported... the lead dev said something about not having time, but that he wasn't intending to drop it completely.

nikron · 2007-05-23 22:36:30

This is my dilemma , should I get a GUI for cdrecord, I'm fine with it, but I feel a little silly for using CLI tools in X...

hussam · 2007-05-23 23:43:00

phrakture, my recommendation is move it to unsupported and move brasero to extra. Brasero is actively maintained upstream with a roadmap for 0.6 and 0.7 releases.
On the long run, it is better to have a supported application than a non-supported one.
0.5.90 is extremely stable and much better than 0.5.2 so 0.6 promises to be a great release.

dolby · 2007-05-24 00:34:06

the thing i dislike about brasero is that it has even more gnome deps than gnomebaker and a person who is not using gnome is rather unlikely to install it.

[root@arch ~]# pacman -S brasero
resolving dependencies... done.
looking for inter-conflicts... done.

Targets: orbit2-2.14.7-2  gconf-2.18.0.1-3  libdaemon-0.10-1  
         nss-mdns-0.8-1  avahi-0.6.17-1  
         gnome-mime-data-2.18.0-3  gnome-vfs-2.18.1-1  
         totem-plparser-2.18.2-1  xdg-utils-1.0.1-1  
         archlinux-menus-1.2-1  gnome-menus-2.18.0-2  
         gail-1.18.0-2  libgnome-2.18.0-2  
         libbonoboui-2.18.0-2  gnome-keyring-0.8.1-2  
         libgnomeui-2.18.1-2  docbook-xsl-1.71.1-2  
         scrollkeeper-0.3.14-5  gnome-desktop-2.18.1-1  
         eel-2.18.0.1-2  libbeagle-0.2.17-1  
         nautilus-2.18.1-1  libnotify-0.4.4-1  
         gnome-mount-0.6-1  nautilus-cd-burner-2.18.1-1  
         gstreamer0.10-0.10.12-1  liboil-0.3.10-2  
         gstreamer0.10-base-0.10.12-1  damageproto-1.1.0-1  
         libxdamage-1.1-1  gstreamer0.10-good-0.10.5-2  
         gstreamer0.10-gconf-0.10.5-2  libburn-0.3.6-1  
         libisofs-0.2.4-1  brasero-0.5.2-5  
         libbonobo-2.18.0-2  

Total Package Size:   18.70 MB

Proceed with installation? [Y/n] n
[root@arch ~]# pacman -S gnomebaker
resolving dependencies... done.
looking for inter-conflicts... done.

Targets: gconf-2.18.0.1-3  avahi-0.6.17-1  
         gnome-mime-data-2.18.0-3  gnome-vfs-2.18.1-1  
         orbit2-2.14.7-2  libbonobo-2.18.0-2  
         libgnome-2.18.0-2  libbonoboui-2.18.0-2  
         gnome-keyring-0.8.1-2  libgnomeui-2.18.1-2  
         docbook-xsl-1.71.1-2  scrollkeeper-0.3.14-5  
         gstreamer0.10-0.10.12-1  liboil-0.3.10-2  
         gstreamer0.10-base-0.10.12-1  
         gstreamer0.10-ogg-0.10.12-1  
         gstreamer0.10-vorbis-0.10.12-1  libnotify-0.4.4-1  
         gnomebaker-0.6.1-3  libdaemon-0.10-1  nss-mdns-0.8-1  

Total Package Size:   11.59 MB

other than that i havent ever used it, but my experience with gnomebaker on arch has been rather sad, at least as normal user..

Last edited by dolby (2007-05-24 00:34:47)

Xilon · 2007-05-30 10:58:57

Oh wow indeed, way too many deps. I have Gnomebaker installed (it's cool), and I still need ~20 extra dependencies, including Nautilus (wtf?)... I'll stick with Gnomebaker thanks.

slackhack · 2007-06-04 19:19:06

please don't get rid of gnomebaker. brasero sucks, imho. the interface is almost unusable, with all the files on the right so truncated that you can't even read them. gnomebaker has a much more sensible layout, with panels top and bottom so you can have full width.

brasero also appears to have no gui configurations at all. no burner is detected, no menu options or preferences -- how the h3ll are you supposed to use this thing? is there a config file somewhere i don't know about? it's unusable as installed on my laptop at least, haven't checked on my desktop. plus as dolby pointed out, there's even more dependencies for brasero than for baker.

graveman is okay for quick burns, but it doesn't always seem reliable. aside from having to install nero, it seems there are really no really functional gtk2 burners like k3b is for qt (and nero isn't even as good, but at least it works). gnomebaker is the best of the three, so please don't reduce gtk2 choices even more to two.

>>okay, i troubleshooted that brasero problem and it was a hal screwup. but i still like gnomebaker better!

Last edited by slackhack (2007-06-04 20:57:09)

ozar · 2007-06-17 00:14:11

phrakture wrote:

My big dilemma is whether or not to drop gnomebaker from the repos, or at least to unsupported... the lead dev said something about not having time, but that he wasn't intending to drop it completely.

Hi, phrakture: I see that gnomebaker has now been moved to AUR, but brasero still resides there, too. Will it be moved to extra, or will it remain in AUR?

Thanks...

oz

Arch Linux

#1 2007-05-23 19:13:49

Gnome Baker

#2 2007-05-23 19:46:31

Re: Gnome Baker

#3 2007-05-23 20:14:32

Re: Gnome Baker

#4 2007-05-23 20:17:50

Re: Gnome Baker

#5 2007-05-23 22:03:08

Re: Gnome Baker

#6 2007-05-23 22:30:00

Re: Gnome Baker

#7 2007-05-23 22:36:30

Re: Gnome Baker

#8 2007-05-23 23:43:00

Re: Gnome Baker

#9 2007-05-24 00:34:06

Re: Gnome Baker

#10 2007-05-30 10:58:57

Re: Gnome Baker

#11 2007-06-04 19:19:06

Re: Gnome Baker

#12 2007-06-17 00:14:11

Re: Gnome Baker

Board footer