Hi,

Atsushi Eno schrieb:
> I was trying to autotoolize portmidi and I have portmidi.dll and
> porttime.dll for my C# binding, though with some manual changes.
> http://github.com/atsushieno/portmidi-sharp/tree/e5070610f932a5ad2f9c0e00056e166a750f161e/portmidi-patches
> 
> The win32 patch contains a build script and autogen.sh to build
> required things. Though I haven't verified if it really works out
> of the box.

thanks for the hint and the patches. After I set up all the MinGW/msys
stuff on my Windows VM (which includes compiling autoconf, automake and
libtool), I managed to build the library with your patches. The
"autogen.sh" script didn't work for me out of the box though. I had to
uncomment the line that created the NEWS, README, etc. files and I also
added the "--prefix=/mingw" option to configure.

Also, it was not possible to configure & build in a separate build
directory. I had to build in the portmidi source directory for
everything to work.

I described the whole process here:

http://chrisarndt.de/projects/portmidizero/


After the "make" step I had separate "libportmidi-0.dll" and
"libporttime-0.dll" files in pm_win/.libs. A few questions about this
result:

- Is this the intended end result?
- If yes, why does the lib name have the "-0" appended? Is this
necessary or is this just a convention to allow for several versions of
the lib to be installed?

- Why are there separate dlls for portmidi and porttime? Would it be
possible to roll them into one like it is done on OS X? The things is, I
want to use the dll with the Python ctypes module (the standard foreign
function interface module for Python) and when I load libportmidi-0.dll,
the system tries to find and load libporttime-0.dll as well and so the
latter has to be in a place where the windows library loading mechanism
will find it.

Thus is would not be possible to put it alongside the libportmidi-0.dll
in the Python package. The same problem would affect other languages
trying to load this lib dynamically, described in this debian portmidi
package bug:

https://bugs.launchpad.net/debian/+source/portmidi/+bug/93728

> I kind of want to make those per-platform patches merged and make
> it build everything (so far it only builds libraries) but haven't
> spent time on it yet.

Apart from the above described problems, your autotools patches work
very well, so I'm all for including them into the portmidi distribution
or maybe an "autotoolized" branch for beta testing should be created first.


Chris
_______________________________________________
media_api mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.create.ucsb.edu/mailman/listinfo/media_api

Reply via email to