I too also wonder why people have problems with the configure script. It works great and allows you to install pd on Linux easily.
On Aug 6, 2014, at 1:19 PM, pd-list-request@lists.iem.at wrote:
From: IOhannes m zmölnig zmoelnig@iem.at Subject: Re: [PD] comments with trailing | ? Date: August 6, 2014 at 11:08:21 AM CDT To: pd-list@iem.at
On 01/31/2014 09:47 PM, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
Btw-- I haven't tested this. I'd be a lot more likely to try out code on Pd Vanilla 0.45 if someone could explain to me how to do incremental builds. If I change a single line in g_text.c in 0.43 it only requires a single "make" that takes about 3 seconds. Doing the same in 0.45 requires "make clean && make", unnecessarily rebuilding all of Pd.
why?
Doing "make" in the src directory of 0.45 only rebuilds the things that need to recompile, but it doesn't update the binary, which makes it useless.
how come?
it works fine here, and the binary is updated immediately.
but, then i don't know which "binary" you are talking about. the actual "pd" binary produced by the autotools, will live in ".../src/pd" (as opposed to .../bin/pd produced by the "traditional" makefile), maybe you just checked the wrong one?
i'm very much in favour of the autotools, as they make the build-system standards conformant. e.g. it's simple to inject *additional* FLAGS (e.g. for security builds). that's whey it is used for the Debian packages.
gfmdsar IOhannes
Dan Wilcox @danomatika danomatika.com robotcowboy.com