[PD-dev] Build dependent behaviour of external [routeOSC]

[IOhannes m zmölnig]

On 03/26/2015 09:49 AM, Roman Haefeli wrote:
> Hi
> 
> Attached patch exhibits different behavior depending on where and how
> [routeOSC] was built. It seems pre-built binaries from the Debian
> repositories insert an empty symbol (see attached patch) in the output,
> but only on amd64 and armhf (Raspberry Pi), but not i386. Also, when I
> compile routeOSC myself on those platforms (amd64, armhf), the result
> shows the expected behavior. 
> 
> routeOSC from Pd-extended works as expected on all platforms.
> 
> It looks to me as if the way the external is compiled is responsible for
> the differences. Among others I'm in charge of the package pd-osc in the
> Debian repository, but I don't have a clue how to track such a problem.
> That is why I am asking the list. Any clues?

are you sure?
i think that this is a problem of the actually installed versions of
pd-osc (maybe you are confusing the current debian package version
"0.2-1" with the prior "0.1-2"?)

in any case, i'm running sid/amd64 and get:
OUTPUT: 99
EXPECTED: YES

> 
> How likely is it that other externals are not working exactly the same
> on different platforms? I'm more concerned about 'not exactly' than
> about 'not at all'.

unlikely.
or likely, depends on your definition of "not exactly".
e.g. some externals will make use of special instructions (think SIMD)
when compiled for a given CPU (SSE4 is likely not available on armhf).

fgmard
IOhannes


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-dev/attachments/20150326/ef644366/attachment.sig>