OK.. applied these. Will vomment on one question below.... On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 04:25:47PM +0100, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: > On 01/15/2016 11:12 AM, Roman Haefeli wrote: > > On Wed, 2016-01-13 at 00:54 +0100, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: > >> On 01/12/2016 11:56 PM, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: > >>> On 01/12/2016 11:34 PM, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: > >>>> i will check this immediately. > >>> > >>> actually it turns out that loading anything via it's absolute path is > >>> broken (and [declare -stdlib] uses this): > >>> > >>> e.g. [/usr/lib/pd/extra/zexy/zexy] fails now. > >> > >> which means that the culprit is really in the new loader code (unrelated > >> to [declare]). > >> > >> anyhow, attached you find two patches that supposedly fix this problem. > >> > >> 0001: does special handling for absolute paths (which was stripped out > >> in my loader rewrite - on purpose, but accidentally no replacement was > >> provided), by trying to load them first (if applicable). > >> > >> 0002: fixes the extra/ stripping/appending when generating the absolute > >> pathnames for stdlib/stdpath. > > > > Thanks for the fix(es). [declare -stdlib] works again for me. > > > > Unlike specified in the help, -lib now searches both, relative to the > > patch _and_ standard paths, while -stdlib only searches standard paths > > and is in accordance to the documentation. Is that intended? > > i think so. > i cannot think of a reason why it should be different. > Well, "-path" works differently (only relative to the calling patch). If indeed "-lib" additionally searches "standard" paths it would seem more sensible to make it act like "-path" - that gives the user the most control.
Quite possibly I'm misunderstanding something though. The whole path/lib thing has become too complicated for me... cheers Miller _______________________________________________ Pd-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
