My music setup was a pinned browser tab for years. It worked, technically. It also ate RAM doing nothing, my media keys only worked when that tab happened to be focused, and I killed the music at least once a week by closing the wrong window. There's no official YouTube Music desktop app on Linux, and most of what exists is the same web player in an Electron shell.

So I built my own. It's called Limusic. Rust and Tauri, no bundled Chromium, audio goes through libmpv.

You sign in with your actual YouTube Music account, so your playlists, likes and subscriptions are just there, and liking a song or adding it to a playlist syncs back like you'd expect.

The part I actually care about is that it's not bare bones:

  • Proper MPRIS, so media keys and your now playing widget just work
  • System tray, closing the window doesn't kill the song, plus play/pause and skip from the tray
  • Discord Rich Presence with album art and a live progress bar
  • Last.fm scrobbling, connect once and forget about it
  • Synced lyrics in a side panel, click a line to jump there
  • Listen Together, synced rooms so you and a friend hear the same thing at the same time
  • 8 themes, including Catppuccin, because obviously
  • Gapless playback, volume normalization, shuffle, repeat, autoplay radio
  • Your queue survives a restart

Free and open source, GPL. AppImage (self updating) or an rpm for Fedora, which is what I daily drive. No Flatpak or AUR yet, both are on the list. There's a Windows build too, and no macOS one yet.

Would really love for people to try it, and I'd genuinely like to hear what everyone thinks. ❤️

Site: https://simohypers.github.io/limusic/ Downloads: https://github.com/SimoHypers/limusic/releases/latest

Not affiliated with Google or YouTube, just a thing I made because I wanted it

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 22 hours ago (1 child)

To what are you referring, though? Are you saying that you won’t ever use FOSS because you do not have the bandwidth to assure it is secure?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 22 hours ago (1 child)

    I'm referring to the person you replied to, who communicated a lack of ability to audit the code while you honed in expressly on laziness.

    You have made a couple leaps in judgment here; I also said nothing about my use or disuse of FOSS projects.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

    I’m sorry that you feel that way. To my credit, they did indicate a lack of ambition to audit the code. Perhaps saying that’s lazy is a step too far, but I think my point is valid. If you cite your lack of ambition to audit the code and then complain that you cannot trust the code is definitely having it both ways by my book.

    You on the other hand cited available bandwidth as the reason to not audit the code. Also a fair reason. You also have the choice not to use the software if you do not trust it. This was why I was trying to understand your comment. If you don’t have available bandwidth to audit the code and that is the reason you don’t care to use it then perhaps that mentality should extend to all FOSS software and you shouldn’t use any of it.

  • source
  • parent