nicolaasjan Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 I installed it, but I don't see the subfolders... Also. I think the ffmpeg.exe and ffprobe.exe should be replaced with current ones from Reino. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroSkipper Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 (edited) 16 minutes ago, nicolaasjan said: I installed it, but I don't see the subfolders... Also. I think the ffmpeg.exe and ffprobe.exe should be replaced with current ones from Reino. Here are the subfolders: And their content: And as you can see I replaced both files, ffmpeg.exe and ffprobe.exe, by more recent XP-compatible ones. If I modify something, it has to make sense. Edited January 23 by AstroSkipper Update of content 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VistaLover Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 2 hours ago, nicolaasjan said: Unfortunately, the fork thereof will not work on Windows XP (is 64bit)... ... The bitness of that executable isn't the only issue with it, apparently ; this PyInstaller-compiled binary has been bundled with py3.10, it seems ... One might check its requirements/dependencies to see if they support py3.8 and then, perhaps, attempt to compile a 32-bit executable based on the py3.8.13+ custom compilation that's used to provide yt-dlp_x86.exe for XP... Though, I suspect, this won't be an easy task for anyone who tries that ... This is, ofc, better suited into a more specific thread, I've gone OT already, am afraid ... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicolaasjan Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 (edited) 33 minutes ago, VistaLover said: One might check its requirements/dependencies to see if they support py3.8 and then, perhaps, attempt to compile a 32-bit executable based on the py3.8.13+ custom compilation that's used to provide yt-dlp_x86.exe for XP... Though, I suspect, this won't be an easy task for anyone who tries that ... Btw, I did already try to build it with Pyinstaller, using Python 3.9 XP build, but errors were thrown... Quote This is, ofc, better suited into a more specific thread, I've gone OT already, am afraid ... You're right. This should belong in Who here has a Youtube-DL compile for WinXP?. Edited January 23 by nicolaasjan 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VistaLover Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 (edited) 7 hours ago, nicolaasjan said: I installed it, but I don't see the subfolders... They're NOT there by default, even if one goes with the "portable" package... That one still creates a "youtube-dlg" directory in my "Roaming" Windows profile (%appdata%\youtube-dlg), with a "settings.json" and a "log" file in it, where a recent version of youtube-dl.exe should reside ... FYI, a fresh "install" of the app now won't fetch the youtube-dl.exe binary by clicking "cog wheel -> Update", because the old hard-coded URI no longer works ... BTW, if you want mp4/m4a files to be properly tagged, you also need a compatible AtomicParsley.exe 32-bit binary... Perhaps @AstroSkipper is willing to share some extra configurations needed for the app to recognise youtube-dl.exe/yt-dlp.exe extant inside those (manually created) additional directories ... Edited January 24 by VistaLover removed some wrong info, apologies 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mina7601 Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 (edited) 14 minutes ago, nicolaasjan said: You're right. This should belong in Who here has a Youtube-DL compile for WinXP?. @Dave-H Please, kindly move all these discussions about youtube-dlp from the previous page to that topic. Thanks. Edited January 23 by mina7601 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroSkipper Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 (edited) 7 hours ago, AstroSkipper said: 7 hours ago, nicolaasjan said: I installed it, but I don't see the subfolders... Also. I think the ffmpeg.exe and ffprobe.exe should be replaced with current ones from Reino. Expand Here are the subfolders: And their content: And as you can see I replaced both files, ffmpeg.exe and ffprobe.exe, by more recent XP-compatible ones. If I modify something, it has to make sense. I've just remembered how I did it with the directories. When calling up the executable youtube-dl-gui.exe the first time, a folder youtube-dlg will be created under Documents and Settings\your username\Application Data. There is a file settings.json which can be edited to specify a different folder for the youtube-dl.exe file. I copied then the folder youtube-dlg into the main programme folder and set this new location in the settings.json file (inside the folder Documents and Settings\your username\Application Data, of course). Edited January 24 by AstroSkipper Update of content 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VistaLover Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 (edited) 7 hours ago, AstroSkipper said: I've just remembered how I did it with the directories... Thanks ; the "issue" and its workarounds are documented in https://github.com/MrS0m30n3/youtube-dl-gui/issues/249 https://github.com/MrS0m30n3/youtube-dl-gui/issues/65 Edited January 24 by VistaLover 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroSkipper Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 (edited) 4 hours ago, mina7601 said: @Dave-H Please, kindly move all these discussions about youtube-dlp from the previous page to that topic. Thanks. No, this would be off-topic, too. We talked only about Youtube Downloaders and web interfaces for downloading YouTube videos. We didn't talk about persons having a Youtube-DL compile for WinXP. You should rather think first and only then demand such actions. @Dave-H Please move the discussion about YouTube Downloaders to my new thread YouTube under Windows XP - Downloaders, players and browser support if you think it is necessary! Thanks in advance! Edited January 23 by AstroSkipper Update of content 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mina7601 Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 Please don't attack me for such request, it's originally @nicolaasjan's idea, not mine! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroSkipper Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 34 minutes ago, mina7601 said: Please don't attack me for such request, it's originally @nicolaasjan's idea, not mine! One just doesn't do that. One doesn't put others first in order to hide behind them. You asked for moderation here and nobody else did. So, for better or worse, you will have to take a stand on your own statements. And if someone says or advises you something, then that has nothing to do with an attack. That's simply ridiculous and nonsense once again. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chermany4ever Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 (edited) 16 hours ago, AstroSkipper said: If AdBlocker Ultimate can block some ads which uBO can't do, then it is only a problem of missing filters I assume so. Whenever possible I've added filters to make sure I cover as much as possible but noticed sometimes new ads appear out of the blue or somehow some manage to get past my blocking rules. I always add personal filters -I should've clarified that before- that's what I was talking about when I said I used uBO combined with AbU. It happened to me many times that I personally blocked ads or items with uBO and they came back every time. So, the ads that uBO didn't manage to block I blocked them with AbU and they didn't appear again. As I said before, sometimes I blocked too many ads and elements that seemed unnecessary and in the end something ended up malfunctioning in the appearance of sites or some main function disappeared -as it happened with the problem that originated my request for help in this thread- then I'd unblock elements one by one until I could see what was only necessary. Also, it always seemed to me that uBO was the best of the adblocking options -that's why I use it as the main one- and that it could be very good but not perfect. That's why I decided to experiment and try to combine it with other extensions instead of going deeper into how I could try to solve these same problems using uBO's tweaking options. Every now and then I keep finding more uses for uBO, it keeps surprising me. Maybe it's my mistake to think I can't ask more from such a good extension and go deeper into it instead. 15 hours ago, AstroSkipper said: these are by no means all the YouTube Downloaders that still work under Windows XP I definitely thought of trying frontend programs. With your recommendations I now have alternatives to entertain myself testing how they work. Thank you very much for that. 11 hours ago, VistaLover said: I did tell you so Sure you did and I understood. I didn't mean to make you repeat yourself. I try to answer as much as I can to everyone and some things escape me. I already resemble ad blocking extensions. 11 hours ago, VistaLover said: why would that happen anyhow (is your H/W failing?) ? TBH, problems inside your browser (St52 in this case) shouldn't be immediately associated to the OS itself A few days ago, for some unexpected reason, the system stopped responding and instead of waiting I pressed reset without thinking and after reboot some files got corrupted. It wasn't so serious that I had to resort to an image right away but I can see the deterioration and I'm already backing up files. With SSD disks everything is easier but I've noticed, from time to time -even after years without problems- the system becomes capricious, some important file becomes corrupted, something starts to fail, some experiment -or an error of impatience as in this case- make the system become unstable and unpredictable. Maybe that is the reason why AbU has started to malfunction after months of trouble-free operation. Once I get back to the image I will know for sure. 11 hours ago, VistaLover said: Personally, I'd feel "crippled" if not able to run CLI apps on this old Windows laptop I hear you. I got to know DOS and I know the basics around but since Windows appeared with its frontend programs I never got interested in commands again. I can be very lazy sometimes, besides this machine is from 2010 so between some over clocking plus 4gb of ram I have no problems regarding slowness or overload. I've told you all that even Windows 7 runs perfectly on this machine and I'm even thinking of extending the ram to 8gb, but I use XP because I like it too much. It's fast, reliable and I could always mould it to my liking in almost every way I could think of. Edited January 24 by chermany4ever corrections and updates 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jody Thornton Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 Sheesh - gotta love Andy Prough's really friendly mention on the Moonies forum. You'd think there'd be appreciation for AstroSkipper's UBO Legacy mod ... but no. https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=30787#p247823 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XPerceniol Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 (edited) Good grief ... I wish they'd tell us how they really feel. Quote Not sure if I trust the msfn contributors Edited January 25 by XPerceniol 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroSkipper Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 31 minutes ago, Jody Thornton said: Sheesh - gotta love Andy Prough's really friendly mention on the Moonies forum. You'd think there'd be appreciation for AstroSkipper's UBO Legacy mod ... but no. https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=30787#p247823 Surprisingly, by Pale Moon Forum standards, there were quite "friendly" things to read there. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now