Re: [PD-dev] Debian packaging: multi-object/single-file libraries or single-object/multiple-files libraries?
On 11/12/2010 05:24 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: On Nov 11, 2010, at 10:23 PM, Jonathan Wilkes wrote: I'm new to Debian and to linux, and have two noob questions: 1. If package A has an abstraction that depends on an object from package B, is package B automatically installed when I install package A? If the package has the correct Depends: set, then yes. For binary libraries, there are tools to do it. For abstractions, its a manual process, but I suppose we could script it. and if something was missed, it would be a bug, that you could report and that can easily be fixed (given that a lot of packages are packaged right now, it might be that there is too little time to check everything manually) 2. If package A has a help patch that uses an object from package B, is package B automatically installed when I install package A? Same as above. there has been some discussion about this, and the consensus was, that help-patch dependencies should be treated as not-hard-dependencies. this would allow advanced users to override the dependency, e.g. _allowing_ to install a library like pd-mapping without having to install pd-pddp. but in general, a user who does not want to tweak their pkg-manager settings, will get a fully functional library. fm,asdr IOhannes signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] Debian packaging: multi-object/single-file libraries or single-object/multiple-files libraries?
On 2010-11-10 22:06, Roman Haefeli wrote: In the case of iemmatrix (and also zexy, which actually already is packaged as a multi-object-single-file library in Debian, but as a one-object-one-file library in Pd-extended) and assuming that there won't be any intelligent loader loader soon, what is the best way to go? as upstream i would highly recommend to package it as a library. if someone sees a need to _also_ package it as multi-file library, one could create 2 binary packages out of the one source package. but _please_ package iemmatrix as single-file-library until all problems with hexloader are sorted out. fgmnasdr IOhannes PS: i knew there was another library i should have packaged for debian. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] Debian packaging: multi-object/single-file libraries or single-object/multiple-files libraries?
On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 09:17 +0100, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: On 2010-11-10 22:06, Roman Haefeli wrote: In the case of iemmatrix (and also zexy, which actually already is packaged as a multi-object-single-file library in Debian, but as a one-object-one-file library in Pd-extended) and assuming that there won't be any intelligent loader loader soon, what is the best way to go? as upstream i would highly recommend to package it as a library. Ok. if someone sees a need to _also_ package it as multi-file library, I guess, there _is_ a need also for the multi-file library. Otherwise patches made in Pd-extended will break. Don't know what is the best way to achieve this. Probably something like this: pd-iemmatrix: generic single-file library depending on the metapackage 'pd'. pdextended-iemmatrix: dedicated iemmatrix package for Pd-extended, dependent on 'pd-extendeded', compiled as one-object-per-file library. What do you think? Does that work for everyone, Hans, IOhannes? OTOH, i could imagine that there won't be acceptance from the pkg-multimedia team for including the same package twice, besides the fact that this is very ugly. But I don't see another way than this or consciously breaking Pd-extended. one could create 2 binary packages out of the one source package. but _please_ package iemmatrix as single-file-library until all problems with hexloader are sorted out. PS: i knew there was another library i should have packaged for debian. I didn't mean to take that away from you. Before I started I wanted to point out possible issues. Roman ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] Debian packaging: multi-object/single-file libraries or single-object/multiple-files libraries?
On 2010-11-11 10:07, Roman Haefeli wrote: pd-iemmatrix: generic single-file library depending on the metapackage 'pd'. pdextended-iemmatrix: dedicated iemmatrix package for Pd-extended, dependent on 'pd-extendeded', compiled as one-object-per-file library. What do you think? Does that work for everyone, Hans, IOhannes? i agree, that the prefixes should reflect the Depends: clause. (pdextended-iemmatrix should thus 'Depend' on pd-extended) however, i don't see, why pd-iemmatrix-multifile (this is _not_ a proposal for a good name) should not be able to run with puredata (if the user deliberately choses so), so one should not tie this package to pdextended. OTOH, i could imagine that there won't be acceptance from the pkg-multimedia team for including the same package twice, besides the this we should probably discuss on the pkg-multimedia list. fact that this is very ugly. But I don't see another way than this or consciously breaking Pd-extended. the question is, how much will break in reality. people using [import iemmatrix] and consequently using [mtx_egg] will not experience any degradation in flavour. people wanting to use [mtx_*] with multifile have a stale flavour anyhow. anyhow, until pd-hexloader is packaged, this discussion is quite moot anyhow. i don't think that switching from single-binary to multi-binary in the package would cause much trouble. PS: i knew there was another library i should have packaged for debian. I didn't mean to take that away from you. Before I started I wanted to point out possible issues. though now i have created some ITPs for various iem-packages, including iemmatrix ;-) mcvasdr IOhannes smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] Debian packaging: multi-object/single-file libraries or single-object/multiple-files libraries?
On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 10:49 +0100, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: anyhow, until pd-hexloader is packaged, this discussion is quite moot anyhow. I could take care of packaging hexloader, but I feel you think there are other issues than with packaging. What are those? Is it still defunct? Since I fixed iemmatrix in Pd-extended, I had the feeling that it works quite well for iemmatrix. though now i have created some ITPs for various iem-packages, including iemmatrix ;-) Good. Roman ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] Debian packaging: multi-object/single-file libraries or single-object/multiple-files libraries?
I'm fine with whatever you want to do with iemmatrix. I haven't used it, so I don't really have much input on it. As for other libraries without aliases or hexloader needs (which is most), I see no reason why the Debian package should not be built with single_object.pd_linux. With the libdir loader, it'll behave just like a multi-object.pd_linux library, and have the added bonus of working namespace prefixes. .hc On Nov 11, 2010, at 7:15 AM, Roman Haefeli wrote: On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 10:49 +0100, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: anyhow, until pd-hexloader is packaged, this discussion is quite moot anyhow. I could take care of packaging hexloader, but I feel you think there are other issues than with packaging. What are those? Is it still defunct? Since I fixed iemmatrix in Pd-extended, I had the feeling that it works quite well for iemmatrix. though now i have created some ITPs for various iem-packages, including iemmatrix ;-) Good. Roman ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev A cellphone to me is just an opportunity to be irritated wherever you are. - Linus Torvalds ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] Debian packaging: multi-object/single-file libraries or single-object/multiple-files libraries?
On that note, I should add that for 'iemlib' there are a number of libraries that depend on iemlib being built as single_object.pd_linux since they need namespace prefix support, for example pdmtl abstractions. The same goes for zexy. pd-zexy is currently just zexy.pd_linux, and some abstractions. .hc On Nov 11, 2010, at 2:52 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: I'm fine with whatever you want to do with iemmatrix. I haven't used it, so I don't really have much input on it. As for other libraries without aliases or hexloader needs (which is most), I see no reason why the Debian package should not be built with single_object.pd_linux. With the libdir loader, it'll behave just like a multi-object.pd_linux library, and have the added bonus of working namespace prefixes. .hc On Nov 11, 2010, at 7:15 AM, Roman Haefeli wrote: On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 10:49 +0100, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: anyhow, until pd-hexloader is packaged, this discussion is quite moot anyhow. I could take care of packaging hexloader, but I feel you think there are other issues than with packaging. What are those? Is it still defunct? Since I fixed iemmatrix in Pd-extended, I had the feeling that it works quite well for iemmatrix. though now i have created some ITPs for various iem-packages, including iemmatrix ;-) Good. Roman ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev A cellphone to me is just an opportunity to be irritated wherever you are. - Linus Torvalds Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute. - from Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] Debian packaging: multi-object/single-file libraries or single-object/multiple-files libraries?
On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 14:52 -0500, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: I'm fine with whatever you want to do with iemmatrix. I haven't used it, so I don't really have much input on it. So I feel there is consensus about packaging iemmatrix (only) as a multi-object library. As for other libraries without aliases or hexloader needs (which is most), I see no reason why the Debian package should not be built with single_object.pd_linux. With the libdir loader, it'll behave just like a multi-object.pd_linux library, and have the added bonus of working namespace prefixes. Agreed. Roman ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] Debian packaging: multi-object/single-file libraries or single-object/multiple-files libraries?
On Nov 11, 2010, at 3:54 PM, Roman Haefeli wrote: On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 14:52 -0500, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: I'm fine with whatever you want to do with iemmatrix. I haven't used it, so I don't really have much input on it. So I feel there is consensus about packaging iemmatrix (only) as a multi-object library. I'd put it this way: I'm don't like ever packaging libs that way, but I don't use iemmatrix, so I won't stop you. :) .hc As for other libraries without aliases or hexloader needs (which is most), I see no reason why the Debian package should not be built with single_object.pd_linux. With the libdir loader, it'll behave just like a multi-object.pd_linux library, and have the added bonus of working namespace prefixes. Agreed. Roman ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev I have always wished for my computer to be as easy to use as my telephone; my wish has come true because I can no longer figure out how to use my telephone. --Bjarne Stroustrup (creator of C++) ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] Debian packaging: multi-object/single-file libraries or single-object/multiple-files libraries?
I'm new to Debian and to linux, and have two noob questions: 1. If package A has an abstraction that depends on an object from package B, is package B automatically installed when I install package A? 2. If package A has a help patch that uses an object from package B, is package B automatically installed when I install package A? -Jonathan --- On Thu, 11/11/10, Hans-Christoph Steiner h...@at.or.at wrote: From: Hans-Christoph Steiner h...@at.or.at Subject: Re: [PD-dev] Debian packaging: multi-object/single-file libraries or single-object/multiple-files libraries? To: Roman Haefeli reduz...@gmail.com Cc: pd-dev@iem.at Date: Thursday, November 11, 2010, 10:30 PM On Nov 11, 2010, at 3:54 PM, Roman Haefeli wrote: On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 14:52 -0500, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: I'm fine with whatever you want to do with iemmatrix. I haven't used it, so I don't really have much input on it. So I feel there is consensus about packaging iemmatrix (only) as a multi-object library. I'd put it this way: I'm don't like ever packaging libs that way, but I don't use iemmatrix, so I won't stop you. :) .hc As for other libraries without aliases or hexloader needs (which is most), I see no reason why the Debian package should not be built with single_object.pd_linux. With the libdir loader, it'll behave just like a multi-object.pd_linux library, and have the added bonus of working namespace prefixes. Agreed. Roman ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev I have always wished for my computer to be as easy to use as my telephone; my wish has come true because I can no longer figure out how to use my telephone. --Bjarne Stroustrup (creator of C++) ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] Debian packaging: multi-object/single-file libraries or single-object/multiple-files libraries?
On Nov 11, 2010, at 10:23 PM, Jonathan Wilkes wrote: I'm new to Debian and to linux, and have two noob questions: 1. If package A has an abstraction that depends on an object from package B, is package B automatically installed when I install package A? If the package has the correct Depends: set, then yes. For binary libraries, there are tools to do it. For abstractions, its a manual process, but I suppose we could script it. 2. If package A has a help patch that uses an object from package B, is package B automatically installed when I install package A? Same as above. .hc -Jonathan --- On Thu, 11/11/10, Hans-Christoph Steiner h...@at.or.at wrote: From: Hans-Christoph Steiner h...@at.or.at Subject: Re: [PD-dev] Debian packaging: multi-object/single-file libraries or single-object/multiple-files libraries? To: Roman Haefeli reduz...@gmail.com Cc: pd-dev@iem.at Date: Thursday, November 11, 2010, 10:30 PM On Nov 11, 2010, at 3:54 PM, Roman Haefeli wrote: On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 14:52 -0500, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: I'm fine with whatever you want to do with iemmatrix. I haven't used it, so I don't really have much input on it. So I feel there is consensus about packaging iemmatrix (only) as a multi-object library. I'd put it this way: I'm don't like ever packaging libs that way, but I don't use iemmatrix, so I won't stop you. :) .hc As for other libraries without aliases or hexloader needs (which is most), I see no reason why the Debian package should not be built with single_object.pd_linux. With the libdir loader, it'll behave just like a multi-object.pd_linux library, and have the added bonus of working namespace prefixes. Agreed. Roman ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev I have always wished for my computer to be as easy to use as my telephone; my wish has come true because I can no longer figure out how to use my telephone. --Bjarne Stroustrup (creator of C++) ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev 'You people have such restrictive dress for women,’ she said, hobbling away in three inch heels and panty hose to finish out another pink- collar temp pool day. - “Hijab Scene #2, by Mohja Kahf ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
[PD-dev] Debian packaging: multi-object/single-file libraries or single-object/multiple-files libraries?
Hi all As you might know, a lot of the Pd libraries are being packaged for Debian. Some of them have already been uploaded and can be installed from unstable. I'd like to include also the iemmatrix library. In Pd-extended, it is bundled as a one-file-per-object library, which allows to instantiate objects by prepending the library name (for instance: [iemmatrix/mtx_*~]). For this to work correctly, the (still to be packaged) hexloader is required, which must be loaded manually by the user. Fact is, that we must assume that Pd-extended users already have made patches using [prefix/objectname], which would break, if the iemmatrix library is packaged as a multi-object-single-file library. This means, that iemmatrix should be packaged as a one-object-per-file library. This again means, that it should be made dependent on the hexloader loader in order to work correctly. The problem is then, that hexloader is _not_ automatically loaded by Pd, but needs to be loaded manually by the user. This in return would break patches created by users used to the multi-object-per-file format of the library and don't know that they are suddenly supposed to load the hexloader to make their patches work, since they hadn't to do that before. Anyway, it's unfortunate to be forced to use a certain loader, when at the same time there'd be the possibility to have a perfectly functional library without loader (BTW: PureDyne has always used a multi-object/single-file library format, so there also users used to that). In an ideal world, the loader would be loaded automatically when needed, so that a one-file-per-object iemmatrix could be made 'just to work the same'(tm) as the multi-object-per-file iemmatrix. However, this would require a special mechanism in Pd to either load all available loaders automatically or load them when needed. From a Debian perspective, making pd-iemmatrix dependent on pd-hexloader would suffice to make it work out-of-the-box. Generally speaking, an extra handling for loaders is not a bad idea. They are not libraries in that they don't provide any functionality by themselves and having to do an extra step to manually load a certain loader before loading the actual library is awkward, also because the library actually 'knows' what it needs. But I don't have the slightiest clue who/if this is going to be implemented. In the case of iemmatrix (and also zexy, which actually already is packaged as a multi-object-single-file library in Debian, but as a one-object-one-file library in Pd-extended) and assuming that there won't be any intelligent loader loader soon, what is the best way to go? I appreciate any opinions on this. Roman ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
