Should I request the latest Shotcut in Testing? [Solved]

[MXRobo]

Should I request the latest Shotcut in Testing?

As it does exist in Flatpac, and as per @richb:

1. check the MX Test Repo, Debian Backports and Flatpacks first to see whether the package/update you want is already in there.

Apparently not! Just a little reluctant to use Flatpaks - no real rational.

Latest Version 22.12.21 (also in Flatpak)
MXPI>Enabled Repos shows 21.01.29+ds-1
Shotcut>Help>About Shotcut per installed app from Enabled Repos: 21.01.31

https://shotcut.org/download/

Ancillary comments:
Latest Openshot 3.0 with >1,000 improvements - added 999 emojis, 10 bug fixes, 9 bugs.
Flowblade, documentation almost non-existent, and unique method of editing, so much so that many "instructional" videos contradict and some are incorrect.
Difficult (or can't) to move many clips at once.

I think Kdenlive is fairly stable and usable but I've generally been under the impression that one shouldn't install KDE apps on non-KDE desktops as they usually install a lot of kde dependencies but I see that D.O. and others use Kdenlive so that indicates that it's not a bad practice at all.
Any thoughts?

How/where can I find AV Linux's applications and versions?

Thanks any/everyone - @Stevo , @AVLinux

[Eadwine Rose]

Please limit the package request topic -as any other- with just one thing, or the overview becomes lost, thanks. :)

[AVLinux]

How/where can I find AV Linux's applications and versions?

Thanks any/everyone - @Stevo , @AVLinux

Hi,

I need to be VERY clear, that for the most part when possible I try to remain with MX Repos and @Stevo and @timkb4cq are incredibly helpful and accommodating. Because AV Linux is highly specialized and because I'm old and stubborn and set in my ways there are some non-Repo Packages I handle myself for various reasons:

- The latest versions are not in Debian or no longer build in Debian Stable without being a major PITA
- The applications are my own utilities and scripts
- The application (ie Kdenlive) pulls a bunch of runtime stuff in from a different DE
- The application (ie Audacity) has features that prevent it's acceptance into the Repos
- The Application (ie Cinelerra-GG) is only provided as another format (in this case AppImage)
- The application is a commercial demo that doesn't fit within Debian/MX Repository policies
- The application is closed-source and provides no source code to build from
- The application is already provided in a supported Deb Package from the developers themselves

When I release AV Linux (and now MXDE-EFL) I now provide an archive folder with these specialized Packages made available for people to reinstall them in AV Linux or MXDE-EFL in the event they get mistakenly uninstalled or people decide to reinstall. This Package archive is meant for that only and I cannot guarantee that they will work on MX, antiX or regular Debian systems and I only test them on AVL/MXDE. That said there is a high probability they will work but that is not the intended purpose so you have been warned..

http://bandshed.net/packages/AV_LINUX_MX-21.3/

[MXRobo]

@Eadwine Rose
Sorry, I was attempting to be conservatively considerate so as not to create more post, but I see that the post could become very scattered – good point.

@AVLinux

Thank you very much for the info and the link AVLinux.
I'll install the newest Shotcut version form flathub, and I may try Kdenlive.

I may try AVLinux on the next major release - 22 or 23.

Thanks.

[Stevo]

Flatpaks can take up enormous amounts of disk space compared to a native package using shared libraries--not really a factor with today's huge disks, but many portable devices such as inexpensive Chromebooks do have limited storage.

I'll take a look at the Shotcut upstream in Debian.

[wdscharff]

shotcut is also available as an appimage, which is much more compact than the Flatpak version.
as a compact *deb might be advantageous for some people
Both work without problems on my system, which is why I have been using only the appimage version for a long time.

openshot is available here (current v3) as *deb in the MXPI test repo, as flatpak and also as appimage.
I have tried all 3, but for space reasons I use the *.deb from the test repo. They all work

I'm less concerned about the disk space on the system than about the size and creation time of the MX snapshots.

[MXRobo]

@Stevo Thanks for looking.

Yes, I recently had my "/" partition filled on another laptop due to Timeshift and MX Snapshot, so space can be a problem if one doesn't size their partitions to accommodate flatpak apps – barring using LVM; but generally, space is not a problem for me.

And, as I said, I'm "Just a little reluctant to use Flatpaks - no real rational."; and I recall
@wdscharff's previous reply to me regarding flatpaks and appImages, so I'm just kind of figuring out what to use.

I tried Openshot 3.0, it might be improved, but I'd like something a little less buggy, better and stable.

I never considered an increase in MX Snapshot time/size.

================================================
Re: "Both work without problems on my system" I may be having an scaling problem as I can't see all of Shotcut's app text, and Text:Rich is placed in the wrong location after exporting.

I'm reluctant to run these commands as I don't know if they affect other apps or if they're permanent; I don't want them permanent if they're a problem. I ran them before and then restored with Timeshift because I wasn't sure.

--QT_SCALE_FACTOR 2
QT_SCALE_FACTOR = 50%
QT_FONT_DPI = 192 DPI
export QT_AUTO_SCREEN_SCALE_FACTOR=1

Well, these are separate issue(s) and not request related.

I'lI also consider appImages, I only used an appImage once, KeepassXC, and it was fairly simple to install.

[AVLinux]

For the record (not that it matters) I've only downloaded 2 Flatpaks (Oomox Theme Generator and Polyphone Soundfont Editor) because I couldn't get updates elsewhere in both cases i went back to older Debian Packaged versions because both Flatpaks had inconsistencies and didn't completely work as expected. I LOVE AppImages but I'd have to be held at gunpoint to install another Flatpak, I think AppImages need some improvement but Flatpaks are a scourge IMNSHO...

As usually happens instead of working together and improving a very good promising option people chased after the next shiny object and sadly AppImages seem to be on the decline... Windows has it's problems but this stuff is going on all the time in Linux.. Only in Linux would we fix the problem of unifying packages across multiple distributions by introducing 3 competing standards..

[Stevo]

I've backported the current mlt and frei0r-plugins packages from upstream Debian and built Shotcut 22.12.21 against them for the MX 21 test repo. Since a native build requires at least Qt 5.15, MX 19 backports are right out--that's where the ginormous universal packages are useful.

[MXRobo]

I too have only used an AppImage once with the help of fehlix, KeepassXC on a usb, it was fine for that purpose.

Re: "Only in linux…." Yes, the advantages of autonomy in each distro, has it drawbacks too.

Thank you @Stevo
Woohoo – a new Shotcut and a 6.1 AHS kernel!

I'll install after this reply.