On Tue, 11 Jun 2013, Richard Shaw wrote: > Ok, I'm assuming you installed yourself then. In that case, yes, I think > you need a newer version of sox. Unless you just want to build yourself I > have provided a EL repository[1] on freedv.org which has all the > dependencies properly packaged including a static build of SOX so that it > doesn't cause problems with the RHEL supplied version.
I'm a bit hesitant to add new repositories. Went and checked out yours and didn't see a sox build on there anyway, so I built sox-14.4.1 from sources and the FreeDV "cmake" build completed. Here's the tail-end of the compile: [ 87%] Building CXX object src/CMakeFiles/freedv.dir/hamlib.cpp.o [ 91%] Building CXX object src/CMakeFiles/freedv.dir/topFrame.cpp.o [ 95%] Building C object src/CMakeFiles/freedv.dir/sox_biquad.c.o /root/src/we7u/freetel/freetel-code/fdmdv2/src/sox_biquad.c: In function 'sox_biquad_filter': /root/src/we7u/freetel/freetel-code/fdmdv2/src/sox_biquad.c:98: warning: passing argument 4 of 'lsx_biquad_flow' from incompatible pointer type /root/src/we7u/freetel/freetel-code/fdmdv2/src/sox_biquad.c:37: note: expected 'size_t *' but argument is of type 'unsigned int *' /root/src/we7u/freetel/freetel-code/fdmdv2/src/sox_biquad.c:98: warning: passing argument 5 of 'lsx_biquad_flow' from incompatible pointer type /root/src/we7u/freetel/freetel-code/fdmdv2/src/sox_biquad.c:37: note: expected 'size_t *' but argument is of type 'unsigned int *' [100%] Building C object src/CMakeFiles/freedv.dir/varicode.c.o Linking CXX executable freedv [100%] Built target freedv I thought it a bit strange that sox-14.2.0 wouldn't work until I saw the date on the 14.2.0 directory on SF: 2008-11-09! So... Never mind! Of course if the FreeDV sources could be tweaked to use sox-14.2.0 with conditional compile statements it might be an easier install for some. Particularly if they need sox for other programs on their system. I managed to do an "rpm -e" on the two sox rpm's with no problems, then installed sox from sources. If I were to later install something that wanted sox, I'd either have to install the original RPM's and just have the newer source install override it (by putting /usr/local earlier in the path), or install the other packages that required sox from sources as well. It gets to be a pain when you mix-and-match source builds with RPM's. For this test VM I don't care as it won't be a problem. > I'm not sure if anyone has tried it yet and I've only done basic testing in > a CentOS 6 VM, so a test report would be appreciated. I don't have the capability to test the CentOS-6.4 build on the air. I can (eventually) test the OpenSuSE-11.1 build on the air though. Just have to get some round tuits. I'll tweak my last message about the CentOS-6.4 build to include the sox build in case other people are searching for the info in the near future. -- Curt, WE7U. http://wetnet.net/~we7u APRS: Where it's at! http://www.xastir.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: Build for Windows Store. http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Freetel-codec2 mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freetel-codec2
