Well, my humble suggestion is to extend the bullet to read "Precompiled for Ubuntu 12.04 Precise (may also work on other distributions)." I assume adding a check to "make install" is the more complicated way.
András On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 6:57 PM, Ivica Bukvic <[email protected]> wrote: > I can see the potential problems. I have however pointed out in the site > in the next bullet immediately below the download links "Precompiled for > Ubuntu (may also work on other distributions)." I guess I really need to > move to the deb model of distribution... > On Nov 9, 2012 12:13 PM, "András Murányi" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Thanks Ico, I completely understood what you meant by compiling from >> source. I just wanted to point out that there is no notice with the >> download link nor a check during "make install" so the "best option for >> newcomers" binary can eventually screw up someone's installation, and that >> someone may or may not have the time/skills/heart to compile the thing from >> source. It's not 100% safe. >> Me, I'll compile it as soon as I have some time. >> >> András >> >> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 6:05 PM, Ivica Bukvic <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Well, those are binaries you tried installing. The script included in >>> the full package simply copies files, it does not do any dependency checks. >>> What you need to do is to compile from source... >>> On Nov 9, 2012 11:57 AM, "András Murányi" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> (Ouch) OK :) >>>> I don't know what's possible during a "make install" but ideally it >>>> would check for the presence of the right glibc in order not to install >>>> something that won't work. >>>> >>>> András >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Ivica Bukvic <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> These were compiled on Ubuntu 12.04. If your distribution uses older >>>>> version of glibc, you will have to compile your own from the dev package. >>>>> Simply follow instructions on the software page. It is pretty much >>>>> automated process provided you have installed all the dependencies (also >>>>> listed on the page). >>>>> >>>>> If anyone is interested in helping me package debs please contact me. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks! >>>>> On Nov 9, 2012 10:28 AM, "András Murányi" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 11:54 PM, Ivica Ico Bukvic <[email protected]>wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Apologies for x-posting... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It is my pleasure to announce latest version a.k.a. stable candidate >>>>>>> of >>>>>>> pd-l2ork. Having chased down a couple of lingering and extremely >>>>>>> sporadic >>>>>>> bugs, I am pleased to report that this latest version is our first >>>>>>> "beta" >>>>>>> release with the primary focus on ensuring 100% stable experience. >>>>>>> The >>>>>>> latest version also includes updates to the K12 module which now >>>>>>> includes >>>>>>> over 40 unique abstractions. As usual, for additional info as well >>>>>>> as both >>>>>>> 32-bit and 64-bit Linux builds please visit >>>>>>> http://l2ork.music.vt.edu/main/?page_id=56 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> I've installed Pd-l2ork-full-x86_64-20121108.tar.bz2 on Ubuntu Lucid >>>>>> and when I start pd-l2ork I get the following error: >>>>>> pd-l2ork: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.15' not found (required by >>>>>> pd-l2ork) >>>>>> pd-l2ork: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.14' not found (required by >>>>>> pd-l2ork) >>>>>> >>>>>> András >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >> >>
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
