I almost pushed out a test release and then found out that "about Pd" gives insane version strings like
this:
Pd version 0 #define PD_VERSION_CODE PD_VERSION(PD_MAJOR_VERSION, PD_MINOR_VERSION, PD_BUGFIX_VERSION).54 #define PD_VERSION_CODE PD_VERSION(PD_MAJOR_VERSION, PD_MINOR_VERSION, PD_BUGFIX_VERSION).1 #define PD_VERSION_CODE PD_VERSION(PD_MAJOR_VERSION, PD_MINOR_VERSION, PD_BUGFIX_VERSION)
I'm pretty sure the culprit is "Makefile.am" in pd/doc:
# get version info from m_pd.h to use in doc/1.manual/1.introduction.txt PD_MAJOR_VERSION = $(shell grep PD_MAJOR_VERSION $(M_PD) | \ sed 's|^.define *PD_MAJOR_VERSION *([0-9]*).*|\1|' )
[...]
This is catching the definition of PD_VERSION_CODE in m_pd.h ...
I couldn't immediately figure out how to fix the ugly Makefile.am stuff, and anyway the whole thing feels fragile to me. What if we change PD_VERSION_CODE to PD_CODE_VERSION ? Will that cause anyone trouble?
cheers
Miller
Aaaaand... the change I proposed doesn't work. I can't yet figure out how to fix this.
On 5/8/24 6:49 PM, Miller Puckette wrote:
I almost pushed out a test release and then found out that "about Pd" gives insane version strings like
this:
Pd version 0 #define PD_VERSION_CODE PD_VERSION(PD_MAJOR_VERSION, PD_MINOR_VERSION, PD_BUGFIX_VERSION).54 #define PD_VERSION_CODE PD_VERSION(PD_MAJOR_VERSION, PD_MINOR_VERSION, PD_BUGFIX_VERSION).1 #define PD_VERSION_CODE PD_VERSION(PD_MAJOR_VERSION, PD_MINOR_VERSION, PD_BUGFIX_VERSION)
I'm pretty sure the culprit is "Makefile.am" in pd/doc:
# get version info from m_pd.h to use in doc/1.manual/1.introduction.txt PD_MAJOR_VERSION = $(shell grep PD_MAJOR_VERSION $(M_PD) | \ sed 's|^.define *PD_MAJOR_VERSION *([0-9]*).*|\1|' )
[...]
This is catching the definition of PD_VERSION_CODE in m_pd.h ...
I couldn't immediately figure out how to fix the ugly Makefile.am stuff, and anyway the whole thing feels fragile to me. What if we change PD_VERSION_CODE to PD_CODE_VERSION ? Will that cause anyone trouble?
cheers
Miller
Just to be sure, this is not any change we did in the doc PRs right? And has this ever been like this or what then?
Cheers
On Wed, 8 May 2024 at 13:50 Miller Puckette mpuckette@cloud.ucsd.edu wrote:
I almost pushed out a test release and then found out that "about Pd" gives insane version strings like
this:
Pd version 0 #define PD_VERSION_CODE PD_VERSION(PD_MAJOR_VERSION, PD_MINOR_VERSION, PD_BUGFIX_VERSION).54 #define PD_VERSION_CODE PD_VERSION(PD_MAJOR_VERSION, PD_MINOR_VERSION, PD_BUGFIX_VERSION).1 #define PD_VERSION_CODE PD_VERSION(PD_MAJOR_VERSION, PD_MINOR_VERSION, PD_BUGFIX_VERSION)
I'm pretty sure the culprit is "Makefile.am" in pd/doc:
# get version info from m_pd.h to use in doc/1.manual/1.introduction.txt PD_MAJOR_VERSION = $(shell grep PD_MAJOR_VERSION $(M_PD) | \ sed 's|^.define *PD_MAJOR_VERSION *([0-9]*).*|\1|' )
[...]
This is catching the definition of PD_VERSION_CODE in m_pd.h ...
I couldn't immediately figure out how to fix the ugly Makefile.am stuff, and anyway the whole thing feels fragile to me. What if we change PD_VERSION_CODE to PD_CODE_VERSION ? Will that cause anyone trouble?
cheers
Miller
Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@lists.iem.at https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
No, it's a conflict between doc/Makefile.am and recent changes in m_pd.h. doc/Makefile.am is quite fragile and a seemingly reasonablechange to m_pd.h broke it. I have to get to a couple of other things now but will try to figure out what to do tomorrow... possibly just take the version-number-setting hack out of the doc :)
cheers
M
On 5/8/24 9:25 PM, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote:
Just to be sure, this is not any change we did in the doc PRs right? And has this ever been like this or what then?
Cheers
On Wed, 8 May 2024 at 13:50 Miller Puckette mpuckette@cloud.ucsd.edu wrote:
I almost pushed out a test release and then found out that "about Pd" gives insane version strings like this: Pd version 0 #define PD_VERSION_CODE PD_VERSION(PD_MAJOR_VERSION, PD_MINOR_VERSION, PD_BUGFIX_VERSION).54 #define PD_VERSION_CODE PD_VERSION(PD_MAJOR_VERSION, PD_MINOR_VERSION, PD_BUGFIX_VERSION).1 #define PD_VERSION_CODE PD_VERSION(PD_MAJOR_VERSION, PD_MINOR_VERSION, PD_BUGFIX_VERSION) I'm pretty sure the culprit is "Makefile.am" in pd/doc: # get version info from m_pd.h to use in doc/1.manual/1.introduction.txt PD_MAJOR_VERSION = $(shell grep PD_MAJOR_VERSION $(M_PD) | \ sed 's|^.define *PD_MAJOR_VERSION *\([0-9]*\).*|\1|' ) [...] This is catching the definition of PD_VERSION_CODE in m_pd.h ... I couldn't immediately figure out how to fix the ugly Makefile.am stuff, and anyway the whole thing feels fragile to me. What if we change PD_VERSION_CODE to PD_CODE_VERSION ? Will that cause anyone trouble? cheers Miller _______________________________________________ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@lists.iem.at https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Am 8. Mai 2024 21:29:43 MESZ schrieb Miller Puckette mpuckette@cloud.ucsd.edu:
No, it's a conflict between doc/Makefile.am and recent changes in m_pd.h. doc/Makefile.am is quite fragile and a seemingly reasonablechange to m_pd.h broke it. I have to get to a couple of other things now but will try to figure out what to do tomorrow... possibly just take the version-number-setting hack out of the doc :)
I guess the simplest solution to the problem would be to use the version from configure.ac, and generate 'doc/1.manual/1.introduction.txt' from 'doc/1.manual/1.introduction.txt.in' (just like the Makefile's are generated from Makefile.in).
Anyhow, I'll have a look at the sed-expression. Shouldn't be too hard
mfg.sfg.jfd IOhannes
On 5/8/24 18:49, Miller Puckette wrote:
I couldn't immediately figure out how to fix the ugly Makefile.am stuff, and anyway the whole thing feels fragile to me. What if we change PD_VERSION_CODE to PD_CODE_VERSION ? Will that cause anyone trouble?
i see you renamed the define. however, the recent changes accepted by you already fixed the parsing issues we were having, so the version in 1.introduction.txt was replaced correctly.
all in all i do not see a reason to use PD_VERSION_{MAJOR,MINOR,BUGFIX} on one hand, and on the other PD_CODE_VERSION version.
the meaning of PD_VERSION_CODE is really "a single code(number) expression the (entire) version of Pd", and belongs into the same family as PD_VERSION_MAJOR ("a single (code)number expression the major version of Pd"). having PD_VERSION_MAJOR and PD_CODE_VERSION adds additional mental load that i would rather avoid.
I now see that the correct action from me (and dan) would have been to both object the rename and propose a fix. rather than just propose a fix (and assume that this would obsolete the rename). sorry for the inconvenience.
gfdmsar IOhannes
the meaning of PD_VERSION_CODE is really "a single code(number) expression the (entire) version of Pd", and belongs into the same family as PD_VERSION_MAJOR ("a single (code)number expression the major version of Pd"). having PD_VERSION_MAJOR and PD_CODE_VERSION adds additional mental load that i would rather avoid.
Agree 100%!
Am 12. Mai 2024 17:45:17 MESZ schrieb Christof Ressi info@christofressi.com:
the meaning of PD_VERSION_CODE is really "a single code(number) expression the (entire) version of Pd", and belongs into the same family as PD_VERSION_MAJOR ("a single (code)number expression the major version of Pd"). having PD_VERSION_MAJOR and PD_CODE_VERSION adds additional mental load that i would rather avoid.
Agree 100%!
And thank god, Christof can parse my autocompletion English...
Of course, it should have read: "a single code/number *expressing* the [...] version of Pd".
mfg.sfg.jfd IOhannes
-
Alexandre Torres Porres -
Christof Ressi -
IOhannes m zmölnig -
Miller Puckette