Rui Nuno Capela wrote:
> Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>   
>> there was no '/etc/ld.so.config', but as you said (and Linux from the
>>     
>
> my bad, the file should be called '/etc/ld.so.conf', and in some distros
> there's a '/etc/ld.so.conf.d' subdirectory where every file is read
> concatenated to same result
>   

Than the /etc/ld.so.config I added is nonsense :D (I'm dyslexic and even 
missed it, when I read the Linux from the scratch link).

The 64 Studio I'm using is a beta version, no release, no release 
candidate and after running 'ldconfig' everything was fine. I often 
noticed an output, when I installed new stuff, something that's called 
'debconfig' was ignored, because of a not installed package. This 
package is in the repositories, but I didn't installed it and I never 
reported it, because until Qtractor couldn't find librubberband.so, 
everything was fine.

Maybe there was the need to run 'ldconfig' after some packages were 
installed and maybe debconfig will rigger this.

Before I run 'ldconfig' manually 64 Studio was broken, but the files 
were still there before, I only added the nonsense file 'ld.so.config'.

r...@64studio:~# cat /etc/ld.so.config
/usr/local/lib
r...@64studio:~# cat /etc/ld.so.conf
include /etc/ld.so.conf.d/*.conf
r...@64studio:~# ls /etc/ld.so.conf.d
kde4.conf  libc.conf  x86_64-linux-gnu.conf
r...@64studio:~# cat /etc/ld.so.conf.d/libc*
# libc default configuration
/usr/local/lib

>> scratch too, but without knowledge I wasn't able to find this link:
>> http://archive.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs-museum/2.3.1/LFS-BOOK-2.3.1-HTML/x2141.html)
>> I added '/usr/local/lib' to a file '/etc/ld.so.config' and run
>> 'ldconfig'. After doing that I didn't compile any 0.4.1 version, but I
>> upgraded to the 64 Studio package version 0.4.0.
>>
>> Now version 0.4.0 starts :), thank you. Maybe I'll compile Qtractor from
>> cvs today.
>>
>>     
>
> you're welcome.
>
>
>   
>> A wish to all coders from Linux applications that come with a virtual
>> mixing console, please add aux channels.
>>
>>     
>
> and what use in particular do you have in mind for those aux channels?
>
> nb. the qtractor mixer is dedicated to its own audio _and_ MIDI
> monitoring and control function, not quite a virtual mixing console,
> although it may look like one ;)
>   

I wish to have aux channels, to individually give the same reverb to 
different channels.
The counter-argument that a sum of channels can get reverb by a sub 
channel is bad, because of the individual volumes that are possible by 
aux channles. Another issue might be different monitorings. There is a 
reason why all 'non-virtual' mixing consoles from a low-coast Behringer 
to an impayable Neve console have aux channels.
Giving each channel it's own 'same' reverb is not only wasting computer 
resources, it also makes changes uncomfortable, especially for Linux, 
were IMO the only very good reverb, jconf, isn't comfortable to set up.

>> I like the graphical design of Qtractor :).
>>
>>     
>
> thanks.
>
> cheers
>   

Best,
Ralf
_______________________________________________
64studio-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.64studio.com/mailman/listinfo/64studio-users

Reply via email to