[PD-dev] flext

[dmotd]

hi hans,

okay, i still have no real idea what you are talking about
here? i get the makefile template, but how exactly does this
relate to a buildsystem, the examples that use the template
are still called by the centralised makefile? 

thomas maintains his own buildsystem and as much as its
apparently stumped a bunch of people in the past, it is
designed for cross platform AND max/msp. to redesign an
entire build system to fit a template, for sake of maintaining
some design rules seems a little over the top, that's why i
decided to simply wrap it. besides, the flext layer has enough
complexity to require a decent autoconf first, and if recent
threads are correct, there's no libdir based autoconf
template.

the thing that has me confused is this notion of packaging?
if pd-X is going to disolve into a system of separated libs
(libdirs?) called by a virtual package 'pd-X', and thus
'debianize' the entire system, then i support that - however
there must be some wrapper script that does the job that
pd-X currently does? i understand that the template is
designed to make that job simpler, by making the build
assumptions the responsibility of each lib and creating a
libdir path, but how does this actually spawn packages?

what i like about pd-X is that it unifies a lot of extras
and provides a neat wrapper for the build, so i'm assuming
that your direction will be providing scripts to wrap
certain build environments (osx/win/fed/deb/ubu/etc).  have
you got examples of how this next generation of build
scripts will look with the makefile-template, or will the
current centralised system slowly morph into the desired
endpoint? i am a little concerned that a 'one size fits all'
may not fit all...

anyway, without some guidelines, i'm not sure i will ever
understand what you have in mind, and what is acceptable
practice. i'm just wanting to contribute something that's
been missing from the pd-x object pool, without getting too
caught up in some fundamental change of practice.

best,
dmotd

Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
> 
> The idea is to have all libraries have their own standalone build
> systems that do not rely on the packages/Makefile.buildlayout stuff.
> That's the idea with the Makefile/library template.
> 
> I think the best plan for flext would be to make a version of the
> template Makefile that works for C++/flext.  Then that Makefile can
> easily be used for Debian/Ubuntu/RPM/etc. packaging.
> 
> http://puredata.info/docs/developer/MakefileTemplate
> 
> I could see including the flext library itself in Pd-extended, that
> is if it is not changing much.  But the externals itself should
> start out separately distributed libdirs IMHO.
> 
> .hc
> 
> On Jun 28, 2010, at 9:50 PM, dmotd wrote:
> 
> >hi hans,
> >
> >the work i've done slots straight into the existing
> >externals/Makefile structure and currently builds fine on
> >linux, it uses thomas' build system and until a better
> >autoconf alternative is created, this is by far the easiest
> >(and has been working quite well for years). as such this a
> >multi-class single lib system.
> >
> >i have followed the libdir rules, with help-files
> >abstraction (and in py/ext case scriptets) in each libs own
> >dir, and other stuff in examples. the actual flext headers
> >and libs get installed in their own $prefix/include
> >$prefix/lib.
> >
> >my intention is to get the flext externals into the nightly
> >autobuid. i'm not sure what you mean by 'distribuited as
> >stand-alone', if this is a reference to your plan to split
> >supported pd-extended libs into individual packages, then
> >i'll need to know more about what scripts you have at your
> >disposal and your release schedule for this new packaging
> >system.
> >
> >i've attached a diff of my working makefile, which will need
> >to be tested against other platforms and linux
> >distributions. currently the following libs build and
> >install correctly: absattr, pool, py, xsample (i am waitinng
> >on some fixes up stream for clk and vasp)
> >
> >sorry for not emailing earlier, i've had little time to work
> >on this stuff and just ran with the momentum with the small
> >time i have had.
> >
> >cheers,
> >dmotd
> >
> >Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
> >>
> >>Hey, I just saw you are working flext stuff, lots of people will
> >>appreciate that.  I don't know your plan, but I wanted to save you
> >>some effort.  At this point, I think that the flext stuff should be
> >>distributed as standalone libraries, rather than integrated with Pd-
> >>extended.  That makes it easier to package too, for things like
> >>archlinux, Debian, Fedora, etc.
> >>
> >>Also, if you are starting in on packaging things for archlinux,
> >>check out the externals/template.  If you can make a template
> >>archlinux packaging file for that, then it'll be really easy to make
> >>packages for all of the libraries that use that template:
> >>
> >>http://puredata.info/docs/developer/MakefileTemplate
> >>
> >>.hc
> >>
> >>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >>News is what people want to keep hidden and everything else is
> >>publicity.          - Bill Moyers
> >>
> >>
> ><flext.diff>
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> I hate it when they say, "He gave his life for his country."  Nobody
> gives their life for anything.  We steal the lives of these kids.  -
> Admiral Gene LeRocque
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-dev mailing list
> Pd-dev at iem.at
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev