shift8 said : > hey chun - all true. and i'm maybe not the best person to respond to > this one seeing as it's been months since my last dd test build but, not > that i've interjected :)
sure, its also been months since i worked on dd too:) but i have started working on it again these days and have added a few things. one of which is adjustable mouse pointer sensitivity, so one can quickly change how far away, or how accurate can a outlet/inlet be hilited. another thing i am working on right now is keyboard controlled patching, so that i don't have to reach for the mouse one million times a minute;) > > building pd can run into the same problems i described for building > desiredata because of various distro variances, i would guess (or that's > my memory playing tricks on me. hey - it happens :) > > i think my point is that compiling code from new source bases all share > the same basic issues, and if you want to be able to test out dd (or > self compile vanilla pd for that matter) you need to first figure out > the debugging methods for compiling under linux before bagging on dd. > yes, another problem is that i might be thinking its easy to compile because it "works" on my laptop, whereas, like you say, every distro are different to some degree. so, i guess unless more people starts to try it out, then we can have a more objective view on things. > there is always the possibility of the latest sources checked out of the > repo having errors accidental introduced that have not been fixed b4 the > developers submits the changes and the time that the code is checked > out, but are usually still things that you can work around if you learn > the build process. > yes, i guess once a person starts to follow any kind of experimental code/project, keeping up to date would be essential. > even though the dd devs are ridiculously ninja skilled (one look at the > source of desire.c give a clue here :) it can still happen - just one of > the (albeit unlikely and mostly self resolving) pitfalls of > team-oriented development. you can also just wait for a bit and try > again w/ a fresh checkout. > i don't know much about desire.c myself, my part of dd so far has been on desire.tk mostly. > no offense meant and good luck! sure, thanks! chun > star > > On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 04:17 +0200, [*~] wrote: > > hi all: > > > > as far as compiling desiredata goes (on linux), it should require just the > > same dependencies as building Pd. > > atm, errors are mostly coming from running it, simply because its still > > very much of a work in progress. > > > > shift8 said : > > > it works, but you need to be able to recognize what additional > > > dependencies are needed for your machine, or code modifications for your > > > distro (different versions of gcc have different ideas of what > > > constitutes a build error, diferent versions of link-in external shared > > > libs are a big one too - generally this is ether discovered by through > > > examining compile-time errors and runtime errors... > > > > > > it takes some work to get a functional build, but that is the nature of > > > deve code, especially dev code from source repositories under active > > > development. > > > > > > the currently implemented features are very compelling if you can get > > > past the hurdles of getting a build, and all of the built-in objects are > > > functional so you can do some patching with it. > > > > > > > yes, once its built, all objects/externals should work, as they are > > compatible with Pd. excepts those involving GUI/tk. as far as patching > > goes, there are still a few main problems that needs to be solved. namely > > GOP and > > optimized patch loading/updating. > > > > > i'd say give it another try - good compelling and way to get knowledge > > > of gcc, linking, etc. etc. too. > > > > > > the fine folks on #desiredata are very helpful for people attempting > > > builds. > > > > > > > the problem with desiredata so far is that both matju and i have been on > > and off with its development (because of other commitments), so it has been > > very slow at times. however, we seen to be around these days, so hopefully > > we will make some good progress on it again soon. > > > > > regards - > > > star > > > > > > On Tue, 2007-05-29 at 10:35 +0200, Damian Stewart wrote: > > > > Chris McCormick wrote: > > > > > > > > > Yeah, I agree completely on all counts. Sometimes really great > > > > > software > > > > > comes out of forks. DesireData looks really interesting, and I know > > > > > that > > > > > nova isn't a fork, but it looks interesting too. Can't wait until some > > > > > of these cool bits of software reach maturity (same goes for Pd)! > > > > > > > > i've never been able to get DesireData to work... > > > > yeah, me too;) > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Mechanize something idiosyncratic. > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > [email protected] mailing list > > > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > > > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list > > > > > > -- > Mechanize something idiosyncratic. > > > > _______________________________________________ > [email protected] mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list > _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
