perhaps you can have the users add their own "-path" statement to the pd command line which includes their own library directory.. like -path $HOME/pd/lib, and make sure it appears before the pd application directory. then have a wrapper script start this "pd application" and make sure it adds this option to the command line. or alternatively, if you are using .pdrc files you could have the user add the -path option to their ..pdrc.
i see no reason to have pd automatically do this when you can bring about the behaviour with command line options.
pix.
On Thu, 08 Nov 2001 09:14:16 +0100 Peter Lunden peter.lunden@interactiveinstitute.se wrote:
The problem is that I have a PD application installed on a system. The application consists of a library of patches. Now the directory of the lib is not writable by the normal users. Normaly the user starts the application from his own directory but the main patch is in the library.
So the user that likes to override some behavior of the default application can not do this without copying a large part of the library to his own directory. I would perfere that the user only needs to copy the patches hi like to change, not half the library. It could also be very difficult to understand what needs to be copyed, the user has to understand the dependencies of the library patches. I consider this as a
large problem.
--PLu
IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Ludde wrote:
Dear list members,
I think there is a problem with the load path of patches in PD. I have
a
situation where there is patches in a library and in the startup directory. Now I like to override some patch in the library by adding a modified version of it in the startup directory. I think this should be a
rather
good idea but PD does not handle the situation as I would like. If you try to
override
a patch that is includen in another patch in the library then PD will open the one from the library and not from the startup directory as I would like. How can you tell PD to first look in the startup
directory?
I have tried to solve the problem without success by using the -path
in
the starup command. How can this problem be solve? What do others
think
about the search order?
i have to admit, that i do not really clearly understand what you mean: if you have an abstraction (like "abstrakt.pd") in one of your search-paths (pe path/pd/extra) and you use it in your patch, it will
be
loaded (aha!). if you create a (better) abstraction "abstrakt.pd" in the directory where your patch is saved (say ~home/pd/patches/), this one will be used... so where is the problem ?
if you want to change pd's behaviour, that libraries are preferred to patches (as it is now) i agree with krzysztof, that this is rather a
bad
idea...
anyhow, you can force a patch to be loaded (even if an external of the same name exists), by giving (sufficient parts of) its path: pe "./abs" will load an abstraction abs.pd in the current directory, although the function "abs" is built into pd
mfg.c.sdaf IOhannes
Best regards, Peter Lunden