On 13/08/10 04:13, IOhannes zmölnig wrote:
>> > Why do you install zexy into a non standard pd path?
> i don't.
> i install the zexy library (binaries and abstractions) into
> /usr/lib/pd/extra/zexy/ which is quite the standard way to do it.
> Pd will look for binaries as /usr/lib/pd/extra/<name>.pd_linux and as
> /usr/lib/pd/extra/<name>/<name>.pd_linux, so it will be able to load
> "zexy" without any further ado.
> however, zexy bundles a number of "abstractions" (Pd interpreter files).
> they used to be installed in Pd's default search path
> (/usr/lib/pd/extra) and are now installed into /usr/lib/pd/extra/zexy
> (both upstream and in my debian package)
> - these files are mostly Pd implementations of functionality offered by
> the binary library. so they are a bit redundant but can be used as
> drop-in replacement, either for educational purposes or because the user
> does not want to load the binary plugin
> - the remaining files are just ordinary Pd files. the user will have to
> add "-path /usr/lib/pd/extra/zexy" to their flags in order to use them
> as they used to do with older version of zexy (e.g. the last debian
> package). this is mainly to avoid namespace pollution.
> figuring that in the near future a lot of new packages for Pd will make
> it into Debian, we have to take care that these packages don't conflict
> (providing the same files with different functionality).
> hopefully this can be handled without excessive use of the "Conflicts:"
> does this make sense?
It does. Howevert, then the README.Debian note is confusing. I thought
one needed to add that to use zexy, which is not the case. It is
necessary to use the abstractions or pd implementation already provided
by zexy. I think this can be worded better.
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list