[PD-dev] Re: [PD] building HID from the CVS, errors

Hans-Christoph Steiner hans at eds.org
Wed Aug 9 22:16:21 CEST 2006

Considering that its now building nightly automatically on numerous  
platforms, and I've largely single-handedly converted most of the  
libraries in CVS to build in libdir format, I don't think the Pd- 
extended build system has proven hard to maintain.  I do sleep, and  
actually have a life outside of the Pd-extended build system...  
sometimes... ;)

In fact, its much better than anything that existed before.  That is  
not to say there isn't a lot that could be improved.  config.h!!


On Aug 9, 2006, at 6:37 AM, Thomas Grill wrote:

> Hi all,
> agreed. Personally, I rarely use the extended distro since i only  
> need a few externals or library, and i don't like to be dependent  
> on a large and probably hard to maintain build system.
> I advocate simple Makefile files that are self-consistent and  
> Makefile.extended or whatever for Hans' GUBS.
> greetings,
> Thomas
> IOhannes m zmoelnig schrieb:
>> David Merrill wrote:
>>> Hello all,
>> hi.
>> i am redirecting this to pd-dev, since i hope this mail will lead  
>> to some further dev-specific discussion and hopefully to some  
>> usable build system.
>>> Has anyone else had a problem trying to compile an external from  
>>> the CVS source? I just checked out the externals dir from CVS,  
>>> and wanted to compile the latest [hid], so after reading the  
>>> README in the hid directory, I typed:
>>>  >make INCLUDE=/usr/lib/pd/src PDEXECUTABLE=/usr/bin/pd
>>> ..and got the following:
>>> --paste--
>> [...]
>>> --end paste--
>>> Why would the build want a /sigpack, and /zexy directory? And am  
>>> I missing a Makefile.buildlayout file?
>> to compile hid (and i guess, any of hans's externals) you need the  
>> entire pd-cvs (at the very least you need the "packages" module)  
>> downloaded from sourceforge.
>> i agree that this is _very annoying_ at the least.
>> my solution to compile something as simple as [folder_list] was to  
>> NOT use hcs's build system at all (i really just wanted to have to  
>> download not more than 1MB to get this single object), but instead  
>> compile the object with:
>> > gcc -g -O2 -I. -DPD -fPIC -export_dynamic -shared -o  
>> folder_list.o -c folder_list.c
>> > gcc -export_dynamic -shared -o folder_list.pd_linux  
>> folder_list.o -lm -lc
>> you might try something similar with hid, although things are a  
>> bit more complicated here.
>> that's basically the answer to your question, the rest is what i  
>> draw as a conclusion:
>> SO:
>> i see the need for a "grand unified build system" for things like  
>> pd-extended. but i am not totally sure, whether everything should  
>> be sacrificed to pd-extended.
>> naturally, hans has the right to do anything with his code,  
>> including forcing anyone trying to build the sources from his part  
>> of the repository with any build system he likes.
>> nevertheless, i would recommend a system that would make the best  
>> of the two worlds: be able to take advantage of the general pd- 
>> extended build system and (at the users option) be able to not  
>> have to use the pd-extended build system (probably at the cost of  
>> having to do some manual configuration if the maintainer doesn't  
>> want to maintain to configuration systems)
>> the simplest solution that comes to my mind is, that one of the 2  
>> systems uses a differently named makefile.
>> since pd-extended's build-system is more likely to be called from  
>> a parent makefile (because somebody wants to build the entire pd- 
>> extended build-system), i suggest to name this Makefile.extended  
>> (or Makefile.buildsystem)
>> anybody wishing to build using the extended build system, would  
>> call "make -f Makefile.extended".
>> other users would just do a "make".
>> a more sophisticated method would use a Makefile.extended and a  
>> Makefile.simple.
>> the ordinary "Makefile" would first check for the existence of the  
>> extended build-system and if present, it would use  
>> Makefile.extended, else it would use Makefile.simple.
>> if test -e ../../packages/Makefile.buildlayout
>> then
>>  # cool, we can use the extended build system
>>  make -f Makefile.extended
>> else
>>  # simple fallback
>>  make -f Makefile.simple
>> fi
>> what do you think?
>> mfg.adsr
>> IOhannes
>> _______________________________________________
>> PD-dev mailing list
>> PD-dev at iem.at
>> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
> -- 
> Thomas Grill
> http://grrrr.org
> _______________________________________________
> PD-dev mailing list
> PD-dev at iem.at
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev

More information about the Pd-dev mailing list