Pd-list January 2022

pd-list@lists.iem.at

38 participants
55 discussions

Re: [PD] Testing Pd builds with JACK
by Dan Wilcox 05 Jan '22

05 Jan '22

Sometimes a developer includes a nice uninstall script, sometimes not. In either case, I usually use Pacifist to inspect the contents of the .pkg and see where they are installed: https://www.charlessoft.com <https://www.charlessoft.com/> That's at least definitive and a few times I actually used it as a guide to manually remove files. > On Dec 16, 2021, at 11:08 AM, pd-list-request(a)lists.iem.at wrote: > > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2021 10:05:34 +0100 > From: Roman Haefeli <reduzent(a)gmail.com <mailto:reduzent@gmail.com>> > To: Pd-List <pd-list(a)lists.iem.at <mailto:pd-list@lists.iem.at>> > Subject: [PD] Testing Pd builds with JACK > Message-ID: <822157ef6f56c1c233e52e26790a6413b72cc273.camel(a)gmail.com <mailto:822157ef6f56c1c233e52e26790a6413b72cc273.camel@gmail.com>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Hey all > > While testing the different Pd builds with different JACK versions, I > wondered how JACK can be uninstalled cleanly. Both JACK versions I want > to try come as a pkg, which installs a bunch of files to different > places. From what I gather, there is no straight-forward way to remove > everything reliably installed from a pkg. So I ask here, if there is an > agreed-upon way to remove one version of JACK before the other one is > installed. I usually wiped all jack* binaries in /usr/local/bin and the > /usr/local/include/jack directory before re-installing JACK packages. I > remember that colleagues had mixed experiences regarding Pd seeing JACK > with the same build of Pd. I suspect this could be related to some > having had left-overs from previous JACK installations. > > For reproducible results I'd like to know how you went about this. > > Roman -------- Dan Wilcox @danomatika <http://twitter.com/danomatika> danomatika.com <http://danomatika.com/> robotcowboy.com <http://robotcowboy.com/>

1 0

Re: [PD] [PD-announce] pd 0.52-1 released / libpd
by Dan Wilcox 05 Jan '22

05 Jan '22

Just run make in the main pure-data directory first (or even just extra), then run make in libpd to get around this for now. I was clearly testing with a fully built source tree when I updated the makefiles, so this issue was overlooked. > On Dec 22, 2021, at 1:20 AM, pd-list-request(a)lists.iem.at wrote: > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 01:12:30 +0100 > From: Antoine Rousseau <antoine(a)metalu.net <mailto:antoine@metalu.net>> > To: "hans w. koch" <hansw.koch(a)gmail.com <mailto:hansw.koch@gmail.com>> > Cc: Pd-list <pd-list(a)lists.iem.at <mailto:pd-list@lists.iem.at>> > Subject: Re: [PD] [PD-announce] pd 0.52-1 released / libpd > Message-ID: > <CAOCG5HyY9k7V8wSKzRNPhjxZK=85Hi1am88zWf8qnTqgx9WHnw(a)mail.gmail.com <mailto:CAOCG5HyY9k7V8wSKzRNPhjxZK=85Hi1am88zWf8qnTqgx9WHnw@mail.gmail.com>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > it's because extras are not compiled with -DPDINSTANCE. > > if you remove the full 98th line of the libpd/Makefile ("bob~.o bonk~.o > choice.o fiddle~.o loop~.o lrshift~.o pique.o sigmund~.o \"), > make clean and re-make, I think the error will disappear. > I was even able to run the test_libpd with some additional hacks. > > Anyway this part still needs work; > work is in progress regarding multi instance hooks (see > https://github.com/libpd/libpd/pull/282 <https://github.com/libpd/libpd/pull/282> and > https://github.com/libpd/libpd/pull/343 <https://github.com/libpd/libpd/pull/343>), before the inclusion of libpd > into Pd can be fully completed. > > cheers > Antoine -------- Dan Wilcox @danomatika <http://twitter.com/danomatika> danomatika.com <http://danomatika.com/> robotcowboy.com <http://robotcowboy.com/>

1 0

dynamically created gui-bangs heavy on cpu & crash pd
by Jakob Laue 05 Jan '22

05 Jan '22

1 0

Re: [PD] Design / Philosophy principles behind Pd development
by Jérôme Abel 04 Jan '22

04 Jan '22

Thanks! The documents highlight by Albert Rafetseder help me to find some answers. From Miller's writing "The Deadly Embrace Between Music Software and Its Users" (http://msp.ucsd.edu/Publications/pdf_EMS14_puckette.pdf), I would synthetise as follow. The three most important criteria in development of Pd: * longevity: o limit of maintainability < 100 000 lines of code (not 10 000 indeed !) o usable lifetime of 50 years : avoid adding any but the most carefully justified and planned extensions now * new versions of Pd should run older patches compatibly (For me, it sounds like the first criteria) * Pd should never stop working unexpectedly during a live performance <3 j.

1 0

Design / Philosophy principles behind Pd development
by Jérôme Abel 04 Jan '22

04 Jan '22

Hi list, I wish a f...... good year for the pd community ! I will teach some workshops about Pd and I would like to speak about the design principles behind Pd Development. I remember some but I don't find these anymore. May someone (Miller ?) validate or explain them ? Two principles I remember : * A pd patch must be run in old computers. Is it related to the choice of C Language and Tcl TK ? Could be also related to some ecological vision about new technologies obsolescence and anti-productivism ? * The number of lines of code must be less than 10 000 ? About the history of Pd, we associate often the design of Pd with Music III - V Max Mathew's program. Could someone validate this, I can't find any screenshots or design principles about Music III - V ? Thanks for any insights ! Best j. http://jeromeabel.net

6 5

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

Pd-list January 2022