However, all functions work except mpv intergration …
I got those error msgs:
todo: windows paths in import screen
Starting main loop...
mpv: error while loading shared libraries: libass.so.9: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/snap/anki-desktop/x8/lib/python3.12/site-packages/aqt/sound.py", line 854, in setup_audio
mpvManager = MpvManager(base_folder, media_folder)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/snap/anki-desktop/x8/lib/python3.12/site-packages/aqt/sound.py", line 408, in __init__
super().__init__(window_id=None, debug=False)
File "/snap/anki-desktop/x8/lib/python3.12/site-packages/aqt/mpv.py", line 442, in __init__
super().__init__(*args, **kwargs)
File "/snap/anki-desktop/x8/lib/python3.12/site-packages/aqt/mpv.py", line 104, in __init__
self._start_socket()
File "/snap/anki-desktop/x8/lib/python3.12/site-packages/aqt/mpv.py", line 194, in _start_socket
raise MPVProcessError("unable to start process")
aqt.mpv.MPVProcessError: unable to start process
mpv too old or failed to open, reverting to mplayer
What confuses me is that libass.so.9 is already included in the snap.
And running mpv directly through the snap debug shell is also ok.
After the mpv issue been solved, I move on to test anki snap version, and it works well.
I would like to know the official view on snap support. If there is no official plan to support it, I am willing to maintain a community supported version.
But currently the name ‘anki’ in the snap store is reserved, and I need official approval to take over the name. Are you willing to support me?
I think adding a suffix like anki-aoyama would make it clearer to users that it’s a community-provided build. That’s what the last person did. Had they been using ‘anki’ as the name, new users installing Anki would find themselves with an out of date version, after the maintainer gave up after a year: Install Anki - unofficial on Linux | Snap Store
Sorry for the delay. What change are you proposing exactly? If it doesn’t cause any problems for the existing packages (i.e. you can’t just remove lines of code that the offical builds depend on), then I would be happy to consider it.