[PD-dev] external directory layout (was: [PD] no pdsend on pdextended?)

Roman Haefeli reduzierer at yahoo.de
Thu May 20 01:09:11 CEST 2010

I moved this to pd-dev.

On Wed, 2010-05-19 at 16:23 -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
> Roman Haefeli wrote:
> > On Wed, 2010-05-19 at 09:41 +0200, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
> > 
> >> anyhow: now that pd-extended installs everything into
> >> /usr/lib/pd-extended/extra/
> >> i don't see any reason why it still conflicts with: pd-externals, gem,
> >> pd-pdp, pd-zexy
> > 
> > On a related note:
> > Where do externals belong that are neither part of puredata nor
> > pd-extended?
> > 
> > Roman
> Check the FAQ for "how do I install externals?"
> http://puredata.info/docs/faq

That is not the answer I was hoping for, but this is because I asked the
question not precisely enough. I meant: Where do externals belong to,
that come in  their own deb package (depending on the meta package

I found the following in the FAQ:


But as we know, /usr/local is for locally installed externals only, i.e.
not for packages from a repository. So, should they probably go
to /usr/lib/pd-externals ? If so, can we make sure somehow, that both pd
and pdextended search in that folder (if they aren't already)?

I feel an urge to talk about this, because many of the pd-lib packages I
know install the loadable files to the traditional /usr/lib/pd/extra
directory (The puredyne packages do and also do mine). The sooner there
is an agreement, the less unnecessary work needs to be done, hopefully.
Also it seems there is no established / discussed standard yet.

I personally am in favour of one single place for additional libraries
that do not come with any of the Pd flavours available, assuming that
libraries usually do not depend on a certain flavour.

What do you think?



More information about the Pd-dev mailing list