Hello Derek, The symlinks aren't created at compile time but during the install process. It is done by target 'install-aliases'. Do 'make install objectsdir=./build' to get a local install. If you still get no symlinks let me know.
I think they are only needed on Linux because of how file access happens. Katja On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 12:01 PM, Derek Kwan <derek.x.k...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 10:52 PM, IOhannes m zmölnig <zmoel...@iem.at> wrote: >> > On 04/08/2016 10:29 PM, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote: >> >> Then, cyclone does not come as a library for a long time, and "Scope~" is >> >> not part of a "-lib" >> > >> > but it is! >> > it is part of a library named "Scope~.pd_linux" which contains a single >> > object "Scope~". >> >> He's building 'scope~.pd_linux'. With a symlink 'Scope~.pd_linux' and >> the alias in the C code, wouldn't that be all right? >> > >> > mdsf >> > IOhannes >> > >> > > Hello, > > I'll chime in here because I've been working on this cyclone update as > well (Alexandre, hop in here if I'm wrong about any of this). To my > knowledge, there isn't any symlinking going on in the build process. I'm > using Ubuntu on my machine and I just built it myself and all I get out > for scope is scope~.pd_linux. All references to Scope has been changed > to scope in Makefile and the source (sickle/Scope.c) got changed to > sickle/scope.c. There's no symlink to scope~.pd_linux at all. Do we want > to change the Makefile to build a symlink to the built scope~ (and also, > what are the reasons for doing so)? Also. is there a symlink equivalent > for Windows machines? I'll be honest, I'm not really familiar with > Makefile building beyond the very basic stuff (I didn't even know you > could make symlinks in Makefiles for instance)... > > Derek > > ===================== > Derek Kwan > www.derekxkwan.com _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list