Re: [PD] The economics of Open source
On 03/18/2011 02:12 AM, ailo wrote: Ardour is open source, which means anyone can add to it or fork it and start making their own version of it. open source doesn't mean that you don't have to pay for a download. it means that if somebody gave you the binarier, they have to give you the source code too, and allow you to do things with it. mfgasdrt IOhannes signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] The economics of Open source
On 03/18/2011 10:03 AM, IOhannes zmölnig wrote: open source doesn't mean that you don't have to pay for a download. True. The licenses in Ardour makes it impossible for them to charge for each copy of the software, though. They could insist to charge for one download, but then the software could be made available elsewhere for free. On the Ardour website they are not forcing you to pay for a download, just asking you to. -- ailo ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] The economics of Open source
They're saying that some functionalities are missing if you don't pay. I haven't answered yet but this thread is very interesting. Thank you all for sharing your insights. Pierre 2011/3/18 ailo ailo...@gmail.com On 03/18/2011 10:03 AM, IOhannes zmölnig wrote: open source doesn't mean that you don't have to pay for a download. True. The licenses in Ardour makes it impossible for them to charge for each copy of the software, though. They could insist to charge for one download, but then the software could be made available elsewhere for free. On the Ardour website they are not forcing you to pay for a download, just asking you to. -- ailo ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] New video - muscle sounds and DIY biosensing wearable technology
Thanks Charlot, sure, you can listen to the raw output in this post on my research blog: http://bit.ly/hWOml0 It sounds like a far thunder, a very low rumble. In the video I shared, the lowest frequency you can hear are the ones which most closely resemble the raw output. They are pitchshifted of about only 20Hz to make them more easily audible and give them a denser body. Raw output sits between 20Hz and 40/45Hz. Even though also infra-sounds are integral part of the MMG signal. cheers, M Marco Donnarumma wrote: The project include a low cost (wearable biophysical sensors), Open Source based (Linux + Pure Data) framework for the application of muscle sounds to biophysical generation and control of music. Sounds interresting, but do you have some raw microphone output? So we can appreciate the relationship between the muscle *sound* and the output you give through pd. Cheers, -- Charlot -- Marco Donnarumma Independent New Media and Sonic Arts Professional, Performer, Instructor ACE, Sound Design MSc by Research (ongoing) The University of Edinburgh, UK ~ Portfolio: http://marcodonnarumma.com Lab: http://www.thesaddj.com | http://cntrl.sourceforge.net | http://www.flxer.net Event: http://www.liveperformersmeeting.net ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] The economics of Open source
its true , sorry that I had it wrong, On 03/18/2011 12:09 PM, ailo wrote: On 03/18/2011 10:03 AM, IOhannes zmölnig wrote: open source doesn't mean that you don't have to pay for a download. True. The licenses in Ardour makes it impossible for them to charge for each copy of the software, though. They could insist to charge for one download, but then the software could be made available elsewhere for free. On the Ardour website they are not forcing you to pay for a download, just asking you to. I thought they would charge something for osx version, but thats also free! I support the ardour project with a subscription because I do all movie-postproduction with ardour (or now with mixbus since that came out on linux recently) and I really like the project. it develops very fast to a very powerful DAW. the ardour financial model works very well I think, but for this specific project. I d say every project needs to find its unique way to finance itself.. you can hardly find a general rule how it works or should work. ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] New video - muscle sounds and DIY biosensing wearable technology
Thanks for the feedback Richie, much appreciate. There's a bunch of processing chains which, overall, include these DSP objects: - pitch shifting - biquad bandpass filtering + reverb + pshift (uses RjLib beequad~ ) - a rt granulator - a granular delay (uses Soundhack [+bubbler~]) - two delays (one of them uses Soundhack [+pitchdelay~]) - a rt time-stretcher - a cos pan However, the most interesting aspect to me is not much about the DSP techniques, but focuses on the mapping of the kinetic energy to control data. It's an interesting study, which requires further exploration. Part of the final research outcome is to release the Pd framework and the related lib I'm developing. There's still much to do though! I love it Marco, Are you granulating the muscle sounds? I hear reverb and delay... Just wondering about your DSP techniques. Beautiful and novel work. Thank you. On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 4:11 AM, Charles Goyard c...@fsck.fr wrote: Hi, Marco Donnarumma wrote: The project include a low cost (wearable biophysical sensors), Open Source based (Linux + Pure Data) framework for the application of muscle sounds to biophysical generation and control of music. Sounds interresting, but do you have some raw microphone output? So we can appreciate the relationship between the muscle *sound* and the output you give through pd. Cheers, -- Charlot ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list -- Marco Donnarumma Independent New Media and Sonic Arts Professional, Performer, Instructor ACE, Sound Design MSc by Research (ongoing) The University of Edinburgh, UK ~ Portfolio: http://marcodonnarumma.com Lab: http://www.thesaddj.com | http://cntrl.sourceforge.net | http://www.flxer.net Event: http://www.liveperformersmeeting.net ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] The economics of Open source
On 03/18/2011 01:39 PM, Pierre Massat wrote: They're saying that some functionalities are missing if you don't pay. No functionalities are missing to my knowledge. ' The reason to why there are different licenses is because different people have contributed, as is usually the case with any big open source project. Just look at the Linux kernel. That is a monstrous project, involving all kinds of licenses. To my knowledge, Ardour is not only partly freely available. It's fully freely available. It is almost purely, a GPL based project, like most GNU / Linux open source projects. If you are interested in investigating the meaning of the licenses, I suggest you download the full source of Ardour. Then look up each license for each bit of code to see what they mean. -- ailo ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] The economics of Open source
You can edit the amount in the box below to *any* amount you wish, If you are downloading a ready-to-run version, and choose to pay nothing, you will get one that is missing some handy functionality. (from their website, Download page). Pierre 2011/3/18 ailo ailo...@gmail.com On 03/18/2011 01:39 PM, Pierre Massat wrote: They're saying that some functionalities are missing if you don't pay. No functionalities are missing to my knowledge. ' The reason to why there are different licenses is because different people have contributed, as is usually the case with any big open source project. Just look at the Linux kernel. That is a monstrous project, involving all kinds of licenses. To my knowledge, Ardour is not only partly freely available. It's fully freely available. It is almost purely, a GPL based project, like most GNU / Linux open source projects. If you are interested in investigating the meaning of the licenses, I suggest you download the full source of Ardour. Then look up each license for each bit of code to see what they mean. -- ailo ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] The economics of Open source
Personally, I find: You can edit the amount in the box below to any amount you wish, If you are downloading a ready-to-run version, and choose to pay nothing, you will get one that is missing some handy functionality. Continuing development, bug fixes and support can only happen if there is money to support those activities. Please become one of the many downloaders who help support the future of Ardour! .. to be a bit cryptic. So, from my viewpoint it's open for interpretation, until someone proves there is in fact a difference between a non-paid and a paid version of a download intended for Mac. As for Linux, there is no ready-to-run version on their site, so I would assume that is not a part of the deal anyway. Also, the source can be compiled on any system, even mac. The point of the fact is that the program is still in larger parts GPL (the parts written by Ardour), which means it belongs to the public, so even one paid download would still become free as soon as the next person made it available to be downloaded for free. On 03/18/2011 02:24 PM, Pierre Massat wrote: You can edit the amount in the box below to *any* amount you wish, If you are downloading a ready-to-run version, and choose to pay nothing, you will get one that is missing some handy functionality. (from their website, Download page). Pierre 2011/3/18 ailo ailo...@gmail.com On 03/18/2011 01:39 PM, Pierre Massat wrote: They're saying that some functionalities are missing if you don't pay. No functionalities are missing to my knowledge. ' The reason to why there are different licenses is because different people have contributed, as is usually the case with any big open source project. Just look at the Linux kernel. That is a monstrous project, involving all kinds of licenses. To my knowledge, Ardour is not only partly freely available. It's fully freely available. It is almost purely, a GPL based project, like most GNU / Linux open source projects. If you are interested in investigating the meaning of the licenses, I suggest you download the full source of Ardour. Then look up each license for each bit of code to see what they mean. -- ailo -- ailo ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] The economics of Open source
I agree that this is quite cryptic. I think i've read somewhere that the functionality that's missing has to do with the plugins. In Ubuntu's repositories there's only a pretty old version of Ardour available. I don't know what the deal is... Pierre 2011/3/18 ailo ailo...@gmail.com Personally, I find: You can edit the amount in the box below to any amount you wish, If you are downloading a ready-to-run version, and choose to pay nothing, you will get one that is missing some handy functionality. Continuing development, bug fixes and support can only happen if there is money to support those activities. Please become one of the many downloaders who help support the future of Ardour! .. to be a bit cryptic. So, from my viewpoint it's open for interpretation, until someone proves there is in fact a difference between a non-paid and a paid version of a download intended for Mac. As for Linux, there is no ready-to-run version on their site, so I would assume that is not a part of the deal anyway. Also, the source can be compiled on any system, even mac. The point of the fact is that the program is still in larger parts GPL (the parts written by Ardour), which means it belongs to the public, so even one paid download would still become free as soon as the next person made it available to be downloaded for free. On 03/18/2011 02:24 PM, Pierre Massat wrote: You can edit the amount in the box below to *any* amount you wish, If you are downloading a ready-to-run version, and choose to pay nothing, you will get one that is missing some handy functionality. (from their website, Download page). Pierre 2011/3/18 ailo ailo...@gmail.com On 03/18/2011 01:39 PM, Pierre Massat wrote: They're saying that some functionalities are missing if you don't pay. No functionalities are missing to my knowledge. ' The reason to why there are different licenses is because different people have contributed, as is usually the case with any big open source project. Just look at the Linux kernel. That is a monstrous project, involving all kinds of licenses. To my knowledge, Ardour is not only partly freely available. It's fully freely available. It is almost purely, a GPL based project, like most GNU / Linux open source projects. If you are interested in investigating the meaning of the licenses, I suggest you download the full source of Ardour. Then look up each license for each bit of code to see what they mean. -- ailo -- ailo ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] The economics of Open source
On 18/03/11 21:46, Pierre Massat wrote: I agree that this is quite cryptic. I think i've read somewhere that the functionality that's missing has to do with the plugins. In Ubuntu's repositories there's only a pretty old version of Ardour available. I don't know what the deal is... Distributions have their own timetables and priorities, the versions they include are not determined by Ardour. A version of Ubuntu is based on a snapshot of Debian sid, or maybe testing, some time before it was released. That would often be more than a year ago. Lots has happened in Debian multimedia in the last year or so, many more applications are available and there is a lot more attention paid to audio now. The Debian repositories are up to date ... $ apt-show-versions -a ardour ardour 1:2.8.11-3 stable ftp.iinet.net.au ardour 1:2.8.11-5 testingftp.iinet.net.au ardour 1:2.8.11-5 sidftp.iinet.net.au ardour/testing uptodate 1:2.8.11-5 2.8.11 is the current release on the Ardour website, though there are certainly other versions in development. Debian stable has software up to 2 1/2 years old. It does not get updated after it is frozen (about 6 months before it is released) and releases are 2 years apart. There was a new release in the last couple of months. Stable is intended to be a version that does not change and has already been heavily tested ... very useful where high security and a fixed set of software versions are needed, say in a webserver. Sid usually contains much more recent versions of software ... perhaps try one of the rolling distributions (like aptosid, there are several) if you want your distribution to contain recent versions. Simon. ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] The economics of Open source
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: One thing about free software funding is that its basically the inverse of the proprietary product model in what you pay for. In a proprietary product, you pay for the work that has been done and turned into a product. For free software, you get the current state of the product for free, so instead you pay for support or you pay for new things to be added to the product. That's what I recommend you pay for, if you are interested in funding some development: think of something you'd like to see improved, and fund that. This means that there is no direct reward for work that has been done already. Then the only way to get a reward for having done work that hasn't been asked for, is always in terms of how much it will get people to offer you money for future work. Perhaps there ought to be a donation system for work that has been already done ? ___ | Mathieu Bouchard tél: +1.514.383.3801 Villeray, Montréal, QC___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] The economics of Open source
2011/3/18 Simon Wise simonzw...@gmail.com: ... perhaps try one of the rolling distributions (like aptosid, there are several) if you want your distribution to contain recent versions. I'd say go for Arch + ArchAudio in that case. It is and getting better and better for audio/multimedia right now ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] The economics of Open source
2011/3/18 Mathieu Bouchard ma...@artengine.ca: already. Then the only way to get a reward for having done work that hasn't been asked for, is always in terms of how much it will get people to offer you money for future work. Perhaps there ought to be a donation system for work that has been already done ? But it ends up being something very similar, given that the maintenance of existing software also counts as future work . Another related thing: I'm a little reticent when it comes to donating to software under the BSD license and the like, considering that my donation could end up being an investment in private corporations at the end. If PureData + extensions will adopt a Donation System, I'd suggest to differentiate donation for GPL and BSD work, so we could donate just for the GPL'ed territory. ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] The economics of Open source
Specifically, the *only* function missing from the non-donation OSX version of Ardour is support for AudioUnit plugins on the Mac. I have no problem with the Ardour model of distribution, and AFAIK you can still use your package manager in almost any Linux distro to avoid even being asked to help support development. Ardour is one of the best things coming out of the world of free software for audio production happening right now, and is well worth any support you can give. Best, Derek On 3/18/11 3:17 PM, ailo wrote: On 03/18/2011 01:39 PM, Pierre Massat wrote: They're saying that some functionalities are missing if you don't pay. No functionalities are missing to my knowledge. ' ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] The economics of Open source
Hi Just an idea, but perhaps a sort of fund raising drive for specific projects for PD? Like say a fund raise drive for extra documentation (did gridflow do this once in 05?), some fancy PD coffee table book : ) or development of some new external ect. each project has it's own licience depending on it's aims? On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 3:21 PM, Bernardo Barros bernardobarr...@gmail.com wrote: 2011/3/18 Mathieu Bouchard ma...@artengine.ca: already. Then the only way to get a reward for having done work that hasn't been asked for, is always in terms of how much it will get people to offer you money for future work. Perhaps there ought to be a donation system for work that has been already done ? But it ends up being something very similar, given that the maintenance of existing software also counts as future work . Another related thing: I'm a little reticent when it comes to donating to software under the BSD license and the like, considering that my donation could end up being an investment in private corporations at the end. If PureData + extensions will adopt a Donation System, I'd suggest to differentiate donation for GPL and BSD work, so we could donate just for the GPL'ed territory. ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] The economics of Open source
I like this idea a lot! .hc On Mar 18, 2011, at 11:30 AM, ALAN BROOKER wrote: Hi Just an idea, but perhaps a sort of fund raising drive for specific projects for PD? Like say a fund raise drive for extra documentation (did gridflow do this once in 05?), some fancy PD coffee table book : ) or development of some new external ect. each project has it's own licience depending on it's aims? On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 3:21 PM, Bernardo Barros bernardobarr...@gmail.com wrote: 2011/3/18 Mathieu Bouchard ma...@artengine.ca: already. Then the only way to get a reward for having done work that hasn't been asked for, is always in terms of how much it will get people to offer you money for future work. Perhaps there ought to be a donation system for work that has been already done ? But it ends up being something very similar, given that the maintenance of existing software also counts as future work . Another related thing: I'm a little reticent when it comes to donating to software under the BSD license and the like, considering that my donation could end up being an investment in private corporations at the end. If PureData + extensions will adopt a Donation System, I'd suggest to differentiate donation for GPL and BSD work, so we could donate just for the GPL'ed territory. ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list ¡El pueblo unido jamás será vencido! ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
[PD] type casting for pix_film
Dear List, I am trying to make a video mixing type patch and am recording videos and naming them based on numbers spat out by the [time] object at the time of recording. Then I want to recall them for play back with something like [time] [][-2][] [set open $1.mov( and pipe that to pix_film, but pix_film tells me: error: [pix_filmDarwin]: unable to find file: ÿAK I can see its a type casting issue but from what to what? sorry if this is completely obvious and thank you for your attention, Sofy ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] type casting for pix_film
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011, sonia yuditskaya wrote: [time] [][-2][] [set open $1.mov( I don't know what you mean when you write [][-2][]. and pipe that to pix_film, but pix_film tells me: error: [pix_filmDarwin]: unable to find file: ÿAK I can see its a type casting issue but from what to what? I first thought that there might be a bug with printing the error message, because I found that Gem has one or more similar bugs. Inside of the source code of [pix_filmDarwin] the error message above is printed by this command : error(unable to find file: %#s, theFSSpec.name); But when looking at the programming manual of MacOSX 10.4 for what %#s means, it says that %#s has no meaning (# would mean nothing when used together with s). So, I don't know what %#s is supposed to be doing there, and whether it means that theFSSpec.name is printed in the console in the wrong way or what. I know that in some places, Gem does (or used to do) : error(blahblah: %s, name); instead of : error(blahblah: %*s, *name, name+1); and that it caused weird stuff to appear in the console when I got those errors, but it's normally a lot less garbled than what you've got : I could really see the filename, prefixed by one unwanted character, and suffixed by possibly a bunch of unwanted characters. However, when I look at what theFSSpec.name is supposed to be in the error message, it looks like it's part of the same problem. You could write that in Gem's bug tracker, with the title : « Gem tries to print Str63 and/or Str255 as if they were ordinary C Strings » and then write that one example of this bug is in Unable to find file. ___ | Mathieu Bouchard tél: +1.514.383.3801 Villeray, Montréal, QC___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] expr family bug?
On Fri, 4 Mar 2011, Moritz Schell wrote: I wrote an expr with If-arguments in it to range values. First I tried it with 5 lines of If-arguments an everything worked fine. Than I tried to get more If-arguments into the expr to get better results BUT after 9 if-arguments everything crashes: Pd closes immediatly and when I reopen and try to change something in the expr Pd crasches again. Even if I try to erase lines out of the expr - CRASH... I get the same problems as well as other interesting error messages : error: expr: ex_eval: unexpected type 0 expr: bang: unrecognized result 1931591688 Are the Objects limited to a specific number of signs/rows/arguments? Any ideas? [expr] may have its own limitations that no-one really knows about. I wrote a replacement for [expr] named [#expr] : http://gridflow.ca/help/%23expr-help.html I wrote it because I wanted to expand [expr]'s feature set to work on grid data but currently [#expr] is just a replacement for [expr] with a few more features and a few missing features. get it at http://gridflow.ca/ make sure you get version 9.13 which fixes bugs in [#expr]. There's no expression size limit in [#expr]. There is no replacement for [expr~] nor [fexpr~]. [#expr] doesn't allow writing a trailing semicolon. You don't need semicolons in your expression if you are just going to add the results together : just replace them by plus-signs. ___ | Mathieu Bouchard tél: +1.514.383.3801 Villeray, Montréal, QC ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] The economics of Open source
On 03/18/2011 11:46 PM, Pierre Massat wrote: I agree that this is quite cryptic. I think i've read somewhere that the functionality that's missing has to do with the plugins. The missing features of ardour from last i checked related to the packaged OSX version and its ability to support the native Audio Units plugins. The crippled version does not allow loading or saving of presets for said format. There maybe a variant of this with VST support. Ardour supports its endeavours through appeals for donations and sponsored feature developement. The OSX version was rushed along with the help of a commercial sponsor. A hardware partner provides a customized commercial Ardour, 'Mixbus', the dsp extensions are to my knowledge closed source proprietary - there is an arrangement to commit open source changes to the base. Ardour itself continues to be completely open-source, and the 'donationware' tag comes from an attempt to put a value on the compiled and packaged binary, which is obviously circumvented by the numerous linux distros which decide to compile and package it themselves. As HCS can probably vouch for, preparing a professional package is still a lot of work! These are the numerous ways that Ardour developers are attempting to recoup the cost of development, which they for better or worse have committed to as a full-time-job. None of these techniques have any relation to the open-source nature of the product, however the open-source nature of the product probably has a bearing on the way they recoup costs. Still I believe Ardour has had limited contributors to the code, so if they wished to band together as a copyright collective they would be well within their rights to create a commercial fork for evermore, leaving us with what we have at present. ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] type casting for pix_film
solved the problem by sending variables to the [seek $1( message in the [unauthorized/playlist] object and feeding that to the [open $1( of [pix_film] don't why that works and the other one doesn't though. bug submitted. Sofy On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 10:15 PM, Mathieu Bouchard ma...@artengine.cawrote: On Fri, 18 Mar 2011, sonia yuditskaya wrote: [time] [][-2][] [set open $1.mov( I don't know what you mean when you write [][-2][]. and pipe that to pix_film, but pix_film tells me: error: [pix_filmDarwin]: unable to find file: ÿAK I can see its a type casting issue but from what to what? I first thought that there might be a bug with printing the error message, because I found that Gem has one or more similar bugs. Inside of the source code of [pix_filmDarwin] the error message above is printed by this command : error(unable to find file: %#s, theFSSpec.name); But when looking at the programming manual of MacOSX 10.4 for what %#s means, it says that %#s has no meaning (# would mean nothing when used together with s). So, I don't know what %#s is supposed to be doing there, and whether it means that theFSSpec.name is printed in the console in the wrong way or what. I know that in some places, Gem does (or used to do) : error(blahblah: %s, name); instead of : error(blahblah: %*s, *name, name+1); and that it caused weird stuff to appear in the console when I got those errors, but it's normally a lot less garbled than what you've got : I could really see the filename, prefixed by one unwanted character, and suffixed by possibly a bunch of unwanted characters. However, when I look at what theFSSpec.name is supposed to be in the error message, it looks like it's part of the same problem. You could write that in Gem's bug tracker, with the title : « Gem tries to print Str63 and/or Str255 as if they were ordinary C Strings » and then write that one example of this bug is in Unable to find file. ___ | Mathieu Bouchard tél: +1.514.383.3801 Villeray, Montréal, QC ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] type casting for pix_film
On Sat, 19 Mar 2011, sonia yuditskaya wrote: solved the problem by sending variables to the [seek $1( message in the [unauthorized/playlist] object and feeding that to the [open $1( of [pix_film] don't why that works and the other one doesn't though. bug submitted. I wrote all the details I wrote to you, in your bug report. BTW, the bug report I wanted to submit was about the error message, because that's the problem I know about, and without a good error message, it's hard to find whether [pix_film] has any real problem with the filename you give it. Thus $1 is not relevant in that bug report. But that's no big deal, because I posted all the details. BTW, doesn't [pix_film] require the full name of the movie ? It doesn't seem to be accepting filenames that are relative to the patch's folder, nor to the items in the Path's dialogue. [gf/find_file] finds a file and gives you the full filename. see http://gridflow.ca/ for that external. ___ | Mathieu Bouchard tél: +1.514.383.3801 Villeray, Montréal, QC___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] The economics of Open source
--- On Sat, 3/19/11, dmotd inaudi...@simplesuperlativ.es wrote: From: dmotd inaudi...@simplesuperlativ.es Subject: Re: [PD] The economics of Open source To: pd-list@iem.at Date: Saturday, March 19, 2011, 4:41 AM On 03/18/2011 11:46 PM, Pierre Massat wrote: [...] Still I believe Ardour has had limited contributors to the code, so if they wished to band together as a copyright collective they would be well within their rights to create a commercial fork for evermore, leaving us with what we have at present. I highly doubt they'll be doing that: http://ardour.org/node/4044 ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
