On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 16:24:06 +0200 Philipp Überbacher <[email protected]> wrote: > Excerpts from Ng Oon-Ee's message of 2010-08-23 16:06:54 +0200: > > On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 14:03 +0200, Philipp Überbacher wrote: > > > Excerpts from Ty John (sand_man)'s message of 2010-08-23 13:53:51 > > > +0200: > > > > On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 19:30 +0800, Ray Rashif wrote: > > > > > On 23 August 2010 19:25, Ty John (sand_man) > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I can't believe I didn't see the 'adopt' button. > > > > > > > > > > > > Yeah I wasn't sure if it's the same or not. Does the one in > > > > > > extra support lv2 plugins? It doesn't seem to be > > > > > > specifically compiled in the same way. > > > > > > I'll keep it updated for now. > > > > > > > > > > Yes, extra/ardour is compiled with LV2 support. The only > > > > > difference between the two different binaries would be > > > > > whatever change is influenced by having FFT_ANALYSIS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > GPG/PGP ID: B42DDCAD > > > > > > > > > > > > > I see. > > > > FFT is an audio visualisation tool. I guess this package > > > > probably shouldn't really be called -lv2 then. > > > > > > When I created it, the [extra] package wasn't built with lv2 > > > support (slv2 wasn't in [extra] either). It appeared sensible at > > > the time, because lv2 support was the major difference. > > > > \me goes to uninstall ardour-lv2 and update from extra =). > > > > Thanks, you're right, the lv2 support was the big difference. I > > recommend ardour-lv2 can be removed, since its not required anymore > > with [extra] having lv2 support. > > Yeah, I did the same. > The difference is small now and -lv2 is a misnomer now, so I'd also be > in favor of removal. The [extra] PKGBUILD is good now and easy to > modify anyway.
Removed. -- Jabber: [email protected] Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
