On 03/09/24 17:47, Jeremy Nicoll - ml sox devel wrote:
> I for one am confused though why it's got a new name, source location
> etc. Is this intended to replace the sox available from:
> https://sourceforge.net/projects/sox/ ?
Even if it is, why is it not just v15, but hosted in the same place
as prior versions, where extant users can find it?
I offered to maintain sox.sf.net as that seemed to make more sense at
the time, but nothing doing so I was forced to make a hard fork. As it
turns out, that was a blessing in disguise because I could fork 14.4.2,
to which most of the existing patches in the distros apply more cleanly,
because it freed me to choose more modern and free tools than
sourceforge.net and because sox.sf.net's commits since 14.4.2 are a
mixture or bug fixes, new features and refactoring, so it would have
been awkward to try and make micro, minor and (possibly) major releases
without a lot of fiddling about.
However, the good work there is filtering into sox_ng, largely because
it is the main source of patches for the distros.
If this is interesting, either fetch a tarball from
https://codeberg.org/sox_ng/sox_ng/releases
I did do, but although README files mention PDFs and EXEs, there are
none such in there. Yes, I know it's "source" but I thought there
might at least be a revised manual to read.
The manual has changed little so far apart from spelling corrections,
but is growing new paragraphs as new features now go in. I guess I
forgot to generate the PDFs as part of the release process.
And unlike Sourceforge there seem to be no Windows builds.
> https://codeberg.org/sox_ng/sox_ng/issues/65
> "Compile for MS/DOS"
I haven't faced Windows builds yet. As a command-line utility I am
assuming that porting to MSDOS and Windows is essentially the same
thing, and that what worked with command.com will work in cmd.exe but I
may be wrong of course.
Also, I for one would not want sox_ng for Windows only to be
available via some sort of setup.exe - I'd prefer just a zipped set
of files that I can place where I want them on my system.
One never knows what an installer does.
Thanks for the input, I'll remember that that's a desirable format when
I (or someone else) faces the Windows build. A static binary containing
all the required libraries may be a simpler solution that wouldn't
provide libsox for Windows, but it appears that almost no one uses that
anyway.
M
_______________________________________________
SoX-devel mailing list
SoX-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sox-devel
