Bug 29963

How comes that a new release of mixxx would depend on an umaintained 9 years old tool when the prior versions didn't?

Also doublechecked on a Fedora 35 build: bpm-tools is not a dependency for building or running of mixxx.

(In reply to sturmvogel from comment #1)
> How comes that a new release of mixxx would depend on an umaintained 9 years
> old tool when the prior versions didn't?
> 
> Also doublechecked on a Fedora 35 build: bpm-tools is not a dependency for
> building or running of mixxx.

It's not for creating and running the mixxx package, but it does involve analyzing music for beats per minute. And you check whether he analyzes beats per minute or not? And you will see that he does not.

Created attachment 13110 [details]
Built-in BPM detection

Strange. According to https://manual.mixxx.org/1.11/en/chapters/djing_with_mixxx.html#bpm-and-beat-detection BPM detection is built-in since version 1.11.

I attached a screenshot with two test songs where the built in analysis and BPM detection worked well out of the box.

Only for some reason it does not work properly, so this lib is involved.

As they boast it is working better than previous per the link sturmvoger found, i think the correct action is to file a bug upstream, maybe discuss on a related forum first.

Are settings correct?
It seems you can select different analyzers
https://manual.mixxx.org/1.11/en/chapters/djing_with_mixxx.html#analyser-settings

CC: (none) => fri

(In reply to Morgan Leijström from comment #5)
> As they boast it is working better than previous per the link sturmvoger
> found, i think the correct action is to file a bug upstream, maybe discuss
> on a related forum first.
> 
> Are settings correct?
> It seems you can select different analyzers
> https://manual.mixxx.org/1.11/en/chapters/djing_with_mixxx.html#analyser-
> settings

I observed on many Linux distributions that the lib inside the package did not work, so they resorted to this lib. As an alternative, you can choose. Moreover, on version 2.2.4 I see inadequate behavior of the bpm analyzer built into mixxx.

So you should definitly file a upstream bugreport then. It's not Mageia related. And it makes absolutely no sense to add a heavily outdated and since 9 years(!!!) dead and unmaintained package to work around an upstream bug.

Also there are only two other rpm based distros which have bpm-tools. And the Opensuse package is not even official, it's only a community based 6 year old third party package.
https://pkgs.org/download/bpm-tools

(In reply to sturmvogel from comment #7)
> So you should definitly file a upstream bugreport then. It's not Mageia
> related. And it makes absolutely no sense to add a heavily outdated and
> since 9 years(!!!) dead and unmaintained package to work around an upstream
> bug.
> 
> Also there are only two other rpm based distros which have bpm-tools. And
> the Opensuse package is not even official, it's only a community based 6
> year old third party package.
> https://pkgs.org/download/bpm-tools

I built with the dependency of this library, like our colleagues from ALTLinux
https://packages.altlinux.org/ru/sisyphus/srpms/mixxx/

Made the assembly without this package, you were right. Thanks for the information.

Meaning it works as is, and we should close the bug as invalid?

(In reply to Morgan Leijström from comment #10)
> Meaning it works as is, and we should close the bug as invalid?

Yes, we can come to consensus. I can assure you that in version 2.3.1 the built-in bpm analyzer already works correctly.

Great then :)

Thank you for checking and the quick and sincere communication!

Resolution: (none) => INVALID
Status: NEW => RESOLVED