Project

General

Profile

"No output plugin found, CentOS 7"

Added by Bram Bavelaar over 9 years ago

I recently switched from windows to CentOS 7, I'm still getting used to the OS so please excuse my lack of knowledge. While trying to boot Audacious, I keep getting the following error:
"
FATAL: No output plugin found.
(Did you forget to install audacious-plugins?)
Aborted (core dumped)
"
Of course I tried removing everything and reinstalling it, but that did not yield any different result. I am installing it using pkgs's latest files (3.5.1), using "sudo yum install audacious". No errors are reported during the install.
Yes, I installed the plugins as well (using "sudo yum install audacious-plugins").

Does anyone know something that could help me a little, or am I doing something completely wrong?


Replies (6)

RE: "No output plugin found, CentOS 7" - Added by Michael Schwendt over 9 years ago

CentOS, being a rebuild of Red Hat Enterprise Linux, by default does not include Audacious. CentOS's extra repositories don't contain it either. So, which package repositories have you added to get RPM packages for Audacious 3.5.1?

Depending on where you've got your Audacious rpms from, it could be that there are more packages than "audacious" and "audacious-plugins". Some packagers create more individual "sub-packages" for plugins, so the user does not need to install everything and may install just what's wanted. Try listing the package contents: rpm -qlv audacious-plugins

Also interesting could be the output of running audacious -V in a terminal. It would tell a lot about which plugins it finds.

RE: "No output plugin found, CentOS 7" - Added by Bram Bavelaar over 9 years ago

Thank you for your fast reply!

I added nux-dextop (li.nux.ro). The possible packages are here: "http://pkgs.org/search/audacious" (am I allowed to embed urls in messages?)
If I run audacious -V, I get the following:
"
main.c:609 [main]: No remote session; starting up.
main.c:494 [init_two]: Loading configuration.
main.c:497 [init_two]: Initializing.
main.c:506 [init_two]: Loading lowlevel plugins.
plugin-init.c:94 [start_single]: Probing for output plugin.
FATAL: No output plugin found.
(Did you forget to install audacious-plugins?)
Aborted (core dumped)
"
If I list the package contents, I get a lot of files. Is there an easy way to show that here in a list or something, without making a giant post? I do see an "output"-folder in the list, so I'm assuming the output plugin is installed as well.

RE: "No output plugin found, CentOS 7" - Added by Michael Schwendt over 9 years ago

main.c:506 [init_two]: Loading lowlevel plugins.
plugin-init.c:94 [start_single]: Probing for output plugin.

That means it found absolutely no plugins at all (i.e. the first line is not specific to output plugins). Why that is would need to be examined on your installation.

Browsing http://pkgs.org/search/audacious for CentOS 7, I see somebody has taken the Fedora 21 rpms for Audacious and rebuilt them without adding an entry to the package changelog. Not nice.

With those packages, if you've really ran "sudo yum install audacious", that has added the plugin package automatically via RPM dependencies:

$ rpm -qR audacious|grep plug
audacious-plugins(x86-64) >= 3.5

I cannot tell anything about the package repository you've chosen. Do they offer an own support forum?

RE: "No output plugin found, CentOS 7" - Added by Ariadne Conill over 9 years ago

I would assume that you've not installed the audacious-plugins package. This is for historical reasons a separate distribution, since there is a large amount of plugins and therefore it reduces release engineering burden to have the possibility of placing them on their own release cycle.

RE: "No output plugin found, CentOS 7" - Added by Michael Schwendt over 9 years ago

Well, that disregards what I had written in the reply before yours.

Let's talk about specific packages then, please. The output of

rpm -qa audacious\*
rpm -ql audacious-plugins|grep In
name -a

would be a start.

RE: "No output plugin found, CentOS 7" - Added by Michael Schwendt over 9 years ago

And it should be "uname -a", of course. Typo.

    (1-6/6)