so let's not mix things together.
- frank and then david thought about packing pd into fink. i would
like to see it in darwinports. for dependency tracking, installing
externals which rely on shared libraries (i prefer them over static
linked ones) one of those package systems just _is_ better. i stated
in my first answer to david: "i'm just thinking about how pd on mac
could be more conveniant for (doubleclick)users AND (cli)developers".
2. i did read man otool, man install_name_tool, man dyld, man ld and
many others, i know much about shared/static libraries, bundles and
frameworks and i did investigations on the web and in the list
regarding a cleaner and more flexible way to build and maintain
pd.app. i know the problems with packing pd and tracking dependancies
and i know the buildsystems and...
3. [rant here] i don't like the darwin_app makefiles. i suggest you
to break things down into logical units, e.g. throw out the html
docs, do externals seperate, just concentrate on the objective
(building the pd.app). so poeple looking at it will find what they
need. [end of rant]. i don't want to discuss this further because i
don't have the time to work on a better system.
don't get me wrong. i like yours and hans work but i'm just a bit
annoyed that i have to mess around with too much build related
problems if i want to change just little things in pd.
keep up the work but please be a bit open for new ideas and try to
understand them...
lorenz
Am 09.11.2005 um 17:34 schrieb james tittle:
On Nov 9, 2005, at 6:28 AM, Lorenz Schori wrote:
Am 09.11.2005 um 12:15 schrieb David Plans Casal:
just think about this possible scenario:
- install pd + externals via package management (fink/darwinports)
+1
...it wouldn't be hard to add a pd package to fink or darwinports,
but I don't think there's that much demand since there's already
several app bundles available...plus, who's got the time to make
packages for the dependencies of all the externals?
- run a script which grasps all the abstractions
and .pd_darwins + docs.
From where? I mean once you've installed with 'fink install pd'
or whatever, how do you envision running the script?i imagine something like pdadmin or phps pdmkapp you mentioned below.
...have ya'll not heard of the "package" build system in cvs? It
does exactly this, for an app bundle...I was just thinking of one big Pd.app being dumped in / Applications, with all needed externals pre-built.
cool. this will be step 1.
...again, this has been done: I can think of at least three
available: mine (pd++.app), Hans', and ben's pixeltango...why re- invent the wheel?
- run a script which grasps all the needed dylib's from the
distribution (using "otool -L")
Interesting.
but sadly not quite straight forward. see http://qin.laya.com/ tech_coding_help/dylib_linking.html
otool won't help much here beyond telling you what is being linked
against: your friend is "install_name_tool", ask man for info...this mechanism could be extended to provide a way to easily
deploy custom Pd.app which just include needed externals and
possibly have patches autostarted.Ok so we could have CLI instructions such as:
'pdadmin myinstallation'
And output would be a myinstallation.app/ directory with pd
binaries, externals, etc? I guess CLI options to that would be
nice. A bit like Django and Rails options.Not sure though, how one would go about building this.
me neither. just ideas.
@hans+james. this is no rant against you and i don't want to
just create another build system. i'm just thinking about how pd
on mac could be more conveniant for (doubleclick)users AND (cli) developers :)And yes, why not rely on the current build systems?
don't know how they will go with fink.
...I use fink for the dependency libs right now...again, I
understand and encourage your interest, but spend some time looking
thru the archives here, and you'll see that this has been well
covered over the last few years...l8r, james