IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
so everythings works fine with the /usr/local/ version.
which is great, but i'd wanted to point out, that in most distros /usr/local/ is for "manually installed" packages (that is, software not under the distro's package management control).
Yes, that's right. I guess that's a "it just works" quick package.
as for the cyclist/pdsend/pdreceive, [...] i wanted to stress that they should be factored out into separate packages (which is the case already for pd/pdx, as we have puredata-utils and cyclist as separate packages), and not be included into the "big superpackages". esp. if they are the only blockers to let the three flavours live side-by-side.
One thing that made me switch from debian (after years of use) to arch is how debian splits things too much (ie -core -dev -doc -utils), and takes detours (alternatives, nested includes...) and thus makes it hard to have something close to the upstream software. Most arch packages are essentially about wrapping the configure/make/make install stance with sensible paths and dependencies. So having pdsend, pdsend.pd-extended and pd.send.pd-l2ork, why not ?
However I'm not religious about that, since I actually install the various pd flavors and versions by hand in /opt :).
So if that makes things easier I'm with you, since using the same packaging scheme across distros is certainly good :).
Regards,