On 6/2/21 18:27, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote:
So, cyclone 0.2beta1 wasn't showing up in deken for macOS, this is something I've been aware of for years, but I only decided to do something about it today.
So I uploaded a new build I did https://puredata.info/Members/porres/software/cyclone/0.2beta1/
The other version that's still up there is in https://puredata.info/Members/fjkraan/software/cyclone/0.2beta1/ I don't know why this build and upload doesn't show for macOS, what's the issue, but hey, maybe we keep it to, I don't know... just warning you people of what's going on.
it does show up.
but the package does not provide a Darwin/amd64/single-precision binary, that's why it doesn't show up as a native-package for the Pd you are using (instead it some weirdo "X86_64" architecture, which is unknown to deken).
The 0.1alpha56 version is what's actually named as extended.v00 and that
there's no such version on deken.
was part of Pd-Extended 0.43, 0.1alpha55 is the one that was part of extended for most of its run and i'd like to upload that too eventually. It'd be good to name them both as 'extended' and use their actual version next to it (extended.0.1-alpha55 / extended.0.1-alpha56) - could we do that?
Yes dear IOhannes, I'm asking you :)
i hear you, but i don't know what you are asking.
could we do that?
yes, from a technical pov.
but i'm not sure about the merits.
- putting "extended" at the beginning of the version string is certain
to break any version sorting. i'm not entirely sure whether those fossil should always be sorted on top. (it has the side-effect that people would start downloading the original cyclone by krzysztof, rather than any new fangled fork)
- but putting the name "extended" into the version, sounds like a bad
idea anyhow. what information will people get from it? and why don't you just put "jessie" or "trusty" in it as well (iirc, Debian/jessie and Ubuntu/trusty shipped this version of cyclone - there was a world outside of pd-extended, even back then).
- yes there are "v0.0extended" versions. i think i've explained
already, that this was done in order to not have to track down the exact version of 100 or so externals (most of which where snapshots anyhow so they had no *real* version, even if some of them would print a version string whenbeing loaded). these files were the *actual binaries* from Pd-extended. the version-number 0.0 was chosen so any library would be sorted before those stub-uploads once a "proper" package was uploaded.
i'm also not sure about the actual merits of uploading newly compiled binaries of 15 year old libraries that are still actively maintained. the original upload happened because we needed a starting base to make deken attractive. it also helped people port their patches from Pd-extended. but there never was a RPi version of Pd-extended.
i'm all for keeping old versions around (as in: don't ever delete artefacts from deken) but that doesn't necessarily mean that we should re-surrect bitrotten "things".
gfDSRA IOhannes