On Sun, 2009-07-05 at 19:10 +0300, Kai Vehmanen wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Stefano D'Angelo wrote: > [using LADSPA unique ids] > > That is bad of Ecasound, since ladspa.h says: > > > > "Plugin types should be identified by file and label rather than by index > > or plugin name, which may be changed in > > new plugin versions."
This is an error in ladspa.h > Ecasound allows to use both label (-el) and unique id (-eli) to identify > plugins. In many cases label is sufficient (versus file+label), and in the > rare case of a conflict, then unique-id is a practical way to select the > correct plugin. There are conflicts with the unique ID too, but there's no accounting for broken plugins I guess. I don't know why people started recommending using the filename/label over the unique ID, but they shouldn't. This varies even between different packages of the exact same plugins (e.g. blop, notoriously), and it's clear from the spec that file/label isn't intended to be important as an identifier... there's an ID in there, use it. -dr _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
