Back in Jan/Feb, I put together a pd-extended.deb package that uses the normal process for building .deb packages rather than the crazy hack that normally builds the Pd-extended .deb packages. I finally worked out the final kinks, and there are now working packages for Ubuntu i386 and amd64 for Lucid and Maverick.
Doing it this way means that anyone can build it using launchpad, opensuse build, or any other standard method. That means its easy to support both i386/amd64 32-bit/64-bit on Ubuntu lucid, maverick, natty, oneiric, precise, and quantal.
I just uploaded builds for Hardy, Jaunty, Karmic, Lucid, Natty, Oneiric, Precise, and Quantal. Hopefully those all build. If this works out, then I'm going to switch all .deb building to this method.
So please test these packages and let me know if they work for you!
https://launchpad.net/~eighthave/+archive/pd-extended
.hc
Would this also work for debian? (squeeze, wheezy, sid, experimental ..)
On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 3:06 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@at.or.atwrote:
Back in Jan/Feb, I put together a pd-extended.deb package that uses the normal process for building .deb packages rather than the crazy hack that normally builds the Pd-extended .deb packages. I finally worked out the final kinks, and there are now working packages for Ubuntu i386 and amd64 for Lucid and Maverick.
Doing it this way means that anyone can build it using launchpad, opensuse build, or any other standard method. That means its easy to support both i386/amd64 32-bit/64-bit on Ubuntu lucid, maverick, natty, oneiric, precise, and quantal.
I just uploaded builds for Hardy, Jaunty, Karmic, Lucid, Natty, Oneiric, Precise, and Quantal. Hopefully those all build. If this works out, then I'm going to switch all .deb building to this method.
So please test these packages and let me know if they work for you!
https://launchpad.net/~eighthave/+archive/pd-extended
.hc
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
launchpad only builds packages for the Ubuntu releases, but you could use one of the Ubuntu packages on Debian if you find an Ubuntu release that is close to your Debian release.
I hear that OpenSUSE's build server will build Debian packages, but I've never used it. It would be very useful if someone set that up, I think can also build Fedora and SUSE packages.
.hc
On Sep 21, 2012, at 10:17 PM, dreamer wrote:
Would this also work for debian? (squeeze, wheezy, sid, experimental ..)
On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 3:06 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@at.or.at wrote:
Back in Jan/Feb, I put together a pd-extended.deb package that uses the normal process for building .deb packages rather than the crazy hack that normally builds the Pd-extended .deb packages. I finally worked out the final kinks, and there are now working packages for Ubuntu i386 and amd64 for Lucid and Maverick.
Doing it this way means that anyone can build it using launchpad, opensuse build, or any other standard method. That means its easy to support both i386/amd64 32-bit/64-bit on Ubuntu lucid, maverick, natty, oneiric, precise, and quantal.
I just uploaded builds for Hardy, Jaunty, Karmic, Lucid, Natty, Oneiric, Precise, and Quantal. Hopefully those all build. If this works out, then I'm going to switch all .deb building to this method.
So please test these packages and let me know if they work for you!
https://launchpad.net/~eighthave/+archive/pd-extended
.hc
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
I used to use a compiler that would do cross compilng - anything from playstation , gameboy to a Microchip PIC16Fxxx. it would be nice to have something like that for linux, windows, and mac.
Are you including the iemlib in these packages or is it just there waiting to be not included anymore. I like the filters in that library even though when I send the stuff they don't like and they explode almost, ~alindx takes care of keeping it a controlled blast. to find a limiter that will do the same is my gettin on it.
On 09/24/2012 12:42 AM, Billy Stiltner wrote:
I used to use a compiler that would do cross compilng - anything from playstation , gameboy to a Microchip PIC16Fxxx. it would be nice to have something like that for linux, windows, and mac.
Are you including the iemlib in these packages or is it just there waiting to be not included anymore. I like the filters in that library even though when I send the stuff they don't like and they explode almost, ~alindx takes care of keeping it a controlled blast. to find a limiter that will do the same is my gettin on it.
The current snapshot of 'iemlib' will be included in Pd-extended as long as it doesn't break. It currently does not have a maintainer in Pd-extended, so if it breaks on a supported platform, it'll be removed.
.hc
How many unmaintained libs are there currently in Pd-extended?
-Jonathan
----- Original Message -----
From: Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@at.or.at To: Billy Stiltner billy.stiltner@gmail.com Cc: Pd List pd-list@iem.at Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 3:04 PM Subject: Re: [PD] pd-extended 0.42.5 packages for many Ubuntu releases, i386/amd64
On 09/24/2012 12:42 AM, Billy Stiltner wrote:
I used to use a compiler that would do cross compilng - anything from playstation , gameboy to a Microchip PIC16Fxxx. it would be nice to have something like that for linux, windows, and mac.
Are you including the iemlib in these packages or is it just there waiting to be not included anymore. I like the filters in that library even though when I send the stuff they don't like and they explode almost, ~alindx takes care of keeping it a controlled blast. to find a limiter that will do the same is my gettin on it.
The current snapshot of 'iemlib' will be included in Pd-extended as long as it doesn't break. It currently does not have a maintainer in Pd-extended, so if it breaks on a supported platform, it'll be removed.
.hc
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Check puredata.info, there is a page called LibrariesInPd-extended or something like that. It has the list, there are many. And I'll probably be dropping more since I can't keep up as it is.
.hc
On 09/27/2012 04:08 PM, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
How many unmaintained libs are there currently in Pd-extended?
-Jonathan
----- Original Message -----
From: Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@at.or.at To: Billy Stiltner billy.stiltner@gmail.com Cc: Pd List pd-list@iem.at Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 3:04 PM Subject: Re: [PD] pd-extended 0.42.5 packages for many Ubuntu releases, i386/amd64
On 09/24/2012 12:42 AM, Billy Stiltner wrote:
I used to use a compiler that would do cross compilng - anything from playstation , gameboy to a Microchip PIC16Fxxx. it would be nice to have something like that for linux, windows, and mac.
Are you including the iemlib in these packages or is it just there waiting to be not included anymore. I like the filters in that library even though when I send the stuff they don't like and they explode almost, ~alindx takes care of keeping it a controlled blast. to find a limiter that will do the same is my gettin on it.
The current snapshot of 'iemlib' will be included in Pd-extended as long as it doesn't break. It currently does not have a maintainer in Pd-extended, so if it breaks on a supported platform, it'll be removed.
.hc
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@at.or.atwrote:
launchpad only builds packages for the Ubuntu releases, but you could use one of the Ubuntu packages on Debian if you find an Ubuntu release that is close to your Debian release.
That sounds like a really bad idea. I'd rather use an actual Debian package.
On 09/24/2012 03:46 PM, dreamer wrote:
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@at.or.atwrote:
launchpad only builds packages for the Ubuntu releases, but you could use one of the Ubuntu packages on Debian if you find an Ubuntu release that is close to your Debian release.
That sounds like a really bad idea. I'd rather use an actual Debian package.
I'd also rather use the package built against the same Debian release, but its not a bad idea to try to install a package on your Debian install when its built on Ubuntu. Worst thing, you'll just have to uninstall it. Its not going to install other packages from Ubuntu, only from Debian, unless you've configured it to do differentl.y
.hc
Well, I've seen systems break before when doing this (take an ubuntu package from launchpad), so I'd really rather not. Have seen horrible dependency problems result from it (maybe not immediately, but somewhere down the line).
So yes, I consider it a really bad idea (bad practice?) and I will never ever do this :P
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 1:19 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@at.or.atwrote:
On 09/24/2012 03:46 PM, dreamer wrote:
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans@at.or.at wrote:
launchpad only builds packages for the Ubuntu releases, but you could
use
one of the Ubuntu packages on Debian if you find an Ubuntu release that
is
close to your Debian release.
That sounds like a really bad idea. I'd rather use an actual Debian
package.
I'd also rather use the package built against the same Debian release, but its not a bad idea to try to install a package on your Debian install when its built on Ubuntu. Worst thing, you'll just have to uninstall it. Its not going to install other packages from Ubuntu, only from Debian, unless you've configured it to do differentl.y
.hc
Sure, if you add an Ubuntu repository to your apt sources.list, that can definitely cause problems. But if you manually download a single Ubuntu package and install it on Debian, then any problems that package might cause can be fixed by doing "apt-get remove my-ubuntu-package".
.hc
On 09/25/2012 03:49 AM, dreamer wrote:
Well, I've seen systems break before when doing this (take an ubuntu package from launchpad), so I'd really rather not. Have seen horrible dependency problems result from it (maybe not immediately, but somewhere down the line).
So yes, I consider it a really bad idea (bad practice?) and I will never ever do this :P
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 1:19 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@at.or.atwrote:
On 09/24/2012 03:46 PM, dreamer wrote:
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans@at.or.at wrote:
launchpad only builds packages for the Ubuntu releases, but you could
use
one of the Ubuntu packages on Debian if you find an Ubuntu release that
is
close to your Debian release.
That sounds like a really bad idea. I'd rather use an actual Debian
package. I'd also rather use the package built against the same Debian release, but its not a bad idea to try to install a package on your Debian install when its built on Ubuntu. Worst thing, you'll just have to uninstall it. Its not going to install other packages from Ubuntu, only from Debian, unless you've configured it to do differentl.y
.hc
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@at.or.atwrote:
launchpad only builds packages for the Ubuntu releases, but you could use one of the Ubuntu packages on Debian if you find an Ubuntu release that is close to your Debian release.
I hear that OpenSUSE's build server will build Debian packages, but I've never used it. It would be very useful if someone set that up, I think can also build Fedora and SUSE packages.
I played around with OpenSUSE's OBS but it's not a success yet. It needs a something.spec file for building RPMs and a something.dsc file for DEBs. Both files serve to define a source package. For the spec file, I started from one well worked out for Planet CCRMA by Fernando Lopez-Lezcano. It's looking good for the OBS right now except that I'm struggling with the source definition, i.e. it doesn't seem to be able to grab the tar.gz from sourceforge. For the debian dsc file, I used Paul Brossier's one. The dsc is much simpler, but it cannot accept source urls, only local files. That's where OBS's so-called "Source Service" comes into the picture, which can download a tar.gz or even checkout an svn repo and tar.gz it for me. I'm struggling with this too, because (1) I'm unable to grab the resulting tar.gz from the dsc (it's created with an odd name that contains a colon) and (2) in the dsc an MD5 checksum of the tar.gz needs to be present which is unknown in the case of an archive newly created from SVN. I'll try to grow smarter with OBS, but in the meantime, any advice is highly appreciated. :)
András
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 1:20 AM, András Murányi muranyia@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@at.or.atwrote:
launchpad only builds packages for the Ubuntu releases, but you could use one of the Ubuntu packages on Debian if you find an Ubuntu release that is close to your Debian release.
I hear that OpenSUSE's build server will build Debian packages, but I've never used it. It would be very useful if someone set that up, I think can also build Fedora and SUSE packages.
I played around with OpenSUSE's OBS but it's not a success yet. It needs a something.spec file for building RPMs and a something.dsc file for DEBs. Both files serve to define a source package. For the spec file, I started from one well worked out for Planet CCRMA by Fernando Lopez-Lezcano. It's looking good for the OBS right now except that I'm struggling with the source definition, i.e. it doesn't seem to be able to grab the tar.gz from sourceforge. For the debian dsc file, I used Paul Brossier's one. The dsc is much simpler, but it cannot accept source urls, only local files. That's where OBS's so-called "Source Service" comes into the picture, which can download a tar.gz or even checkout an svn repo and tar.gz it for me. I'm struggling with this too, because (1) I'm unable to grab the resulting tar.gz from the dsc (it's created with an odd name that contains a colon) and (2) in the dsc an MD5 checksum of the tar.gz needs to be present which is unknown in the case of an archive newly created from SVN. I'll try to grow smarter with OBS, but in the meantime, any advice is highly appreciated. :)
Update: both source access problems are solved for now. The deb build at the moment is stuck at the point where it doesn't recognize the source package as a valid one. Dunno why. The rpm build got as far as where it would have needed mp3lame - seems that it's only available with Planet CCRMA (?). GEM builds fine. I'm playing around with conditionals for requires for different CPU capabilities, because OBS's spec file parser is somewhat limited. More news soon, hopefully.
András
On 09/27/2012 10:30 AM, András Murányi wrote:
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 1:20 AM, András Murányi muranyia@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@at.or.atwrote:
launchpad only builds packages for the Ubuntu releases, but you could use one of the Ubuntu packages on Debian if you find an Ubuntu release that is close to your Debian release.
I hear that OpenSUSE's build server will build Debian packages, but I've never used it. It would be very useful if someone set that up, I think can also build Fedora and SUSE packages.
I played around with OpenSUSE's OBS but it's not a success yet. It needs a something.spec file for building RPMs and a something.dsc file for DEBs. Both files serve to define a source package. For the spec file, I started from one well worked out for Planet CCRMA by Fernando Lopez-Lezcano. It's looking good for the OBS right now except that I'm struggling with the source definition, i.e. it doesn't seem to be able to grab the tar.gz from sourceforge. For the debian dsc file, I used Paul Brossier's one. The dsc is much simpler, but it cannot accept source urls, only local files. That's where OBS's so-called "Source Service" comes into the picture, which can download a tar.gz or even checkout an svn repo and tar.gz it for me. I'm struggling with this too, because (1) I'm unable to grab the resulting tar.gz from the dsc (it's created with an odd name that contains a colon) and (2) in the dsc an MD5 checksum of the tar.gz needs to be present which is unknown in the case of an archive newly created from SVN. I'll try to grow smarter with OBS, but in the meantime, any advice is highly appreciated. :)
Update: both source access problems are solved for now. The deb build at the moment is stuck at the point where it doesn't recognize the source package as a valid one. Dunno why. The rpm build got as far as where it would have needed mp3lame - seems that it's only available with Planet CCRMA (?). GEM builds fine. I'm playing around with conditionals for requires for different CPU capabilities, because OBS's spec file parser is somewhat limited. More news soon, hopefully.
Deb source packages are too tricky to create manually, use the Debian tools. If you are working from a git repo, like for puredata, the use "git-buildpackage -S". For any repo with the debian/ folder there, you can use "debuild -S"
You will need to change the debian/changelog to have your name and email in it, so that the signing part works, if opensuse requires signed packages. Launchpad, Debian, and Ubuntu all do.
At the very least, you'll want to do:
sudo apt-get install dpkg-dev devscripts debhelper cdbs
You can also download the source packages from the Debian or Ubuntu official packages, but they'll be signed by the original uploaders key. That wouldn't work with Launchpad but might with OBS, if it has looser signing restrictions.
If you want to try my new Pd-extended proper debian support, run:
$ ~/auto-build/pd-extended/scripts/auto-build/pd-extended-source-tarball.sh $ mv /tmp/Pd-extended_0.43.1~20120926-source.tar.bz2 ~/auto-build/pd-extended_0.43.1~20120926.orig.tar.bz2 $ cd ~/auto-build/pd-extended $ debuild -S -uc -us
(the -uc -us) means ignore the whole signing procedure, including the name in the debian/changelog)
.hc
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 6:47 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@at.or.atwrote:
On 09/27/2012 10:30 AM, András Murányi wrote:
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 1:20 AM, András Murányi muranyia@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans@at.or.at
wrote:
launchpad only builds packages for the Ubuntu releases, but you could
use
one of the Ubuntu packages on Debian if you find an Ubuntu release
that is
close to your Debian release.
I hear that OpenSUSE's build server will build Debian packages, but
I've
never used it. It would be very useful if someone set that up, I
think can
also build Fedora and SUSE packages.
I played around with OpenSUSE's OBS but it's not a success yet. It needs a something.spec file for building RPMs and a something.dsc
file
for DEBs. Both files serve to define a source package. For the spec file, I started from one well worked out for Planet CCRMA
by
Fernando Lopez-Lezcano. It's looking good for the OBS right now except
that
I'm struggling with the source definition, i.e. it doesn't seem to be
able
to grab the tar.gz from sourceforge. For the debian dsc file, I used Paul Brossier's one. The dsc is much simpler, but it cannot accept source urls, only local files. That's
where
OBS's so-called "Source Service" comes into the picture, which can
download
a tar.gz or even checkout an svn repo and tar.gz it for me. I'm
struggling
with this too, because (1) I'm unable to grab the resulting tar.gz from
the
dsc (it's created with an odd name that contains a colon) and (2) in the dsc an MD5 checksum of the tar.gz needs to be present which is unknown
in
the case of an archive newly created from SVN. I'll try to grow smarter with OBS, but in the meantime, any advice is highly appreciated. :)
Update: both source access problems are solved for now. The deb build at the moment is stuck at the point where it doesn't recognize the source package as a valid one. Dunno why. The rpm build got as far as where it would have needed mp3lame - seems
that
it's only available with Planet CCRMA (?). GEM builds fine. I'm playing around with conditionals for requires for different CPU capabilities, because OBS's spec file parser is somewhat limited. More news soon, hopefully.
Deb source packages are too tricky to create manually, use the Debian tools. If you are working from a git repo, like for puredata, the use "git-buildpackage -S". For any repo with the debian/ folder there, you can use "debuild -S"
You will need to change the debian/changelog to have your name and email in it, so that the signing part works, if opensuse requires signed packages. Launchpad, Debian, and Ubuntu all do.
At the very least, you'll want to do:
sudo apt-get install dpkg-dev devscripts debhelper cdbs
You can also download the source packages from the Debian or Ubuntu official packages, but they'll be signed by the original uploaders key. That wouldn't work with Launchpad but might with OBS, if it has looser signing restrictions.
Cool, I've actually paid less attention to the deb process on OBS knowing that it's already worked out and up-to-date somewhere else. I'll take a look at how I can reuse those packages. OBS doesn't need signed packages, an I haven't tried if it accepts packages signed by someone else.
If you want to try my new Pd-extended proper debian support, run:
$ ~/auto-build/pd-extended/scripts/auto-build/pd-extended-source-tarball.sh $ mv /tmp/Pd-extended_0.43.1~20120926-source.tar.bz2 ~/auto-build/pd-extended_0.43.1~20120926.orig.tar.bz2 $ cd ~/auto-build/pd-extended $ debuild -S -uc -us
Hm, I don't have this script yet in ~auto-build/ ... It seems it doesn't work if I just download it to any place along with its whole folder, but I cannot run it from the main run-automated-builder script either, because rsync cannot reach the server.
(the -uc -us) means ignore the whole signing procedure, including the name in the debian/changelog)
Also, its great that you are taking on the spec file for RPMs! Once you
get 'puredata' working, then it would be very handy if you could make
one for the externals/template. Then it'll be easy to make RPMs for most of the libraries in Pd-extended, just like what's in Debian.
I've never made RPMs before, but I've done a lot of other packaging, so I'll help where I can.
Well, the deb thing is stuck at this line now:
dpkg-source: error: unrecognized file for a v1.0 source package: Pd-0.42.5-extended.tar.gz
The file is pulled from http://sourceforge.net/projects/pure-data/files/pd-extended/0.42.5/Pd-0.42.5... (It has a packages/linux_make/debian folder but still no good.) Is there a .tar.gz for pd-extended online which is suitable for deb packaging and I could link to it? I don't want to reinvent the wheel... BTW, Is there a Pd-0.42.5-extended-dev.deb (or alike) that I could study or use for parts?
The rpm is losing it here:
test -f /home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/Pd-0.42.5-extended/externals/unauthorized/mp3live~/../linux/mp3streamin~.libs && cat /home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/Pd-0.42.5-extended/externals/unauthorized/mp3live~/../linux/mp3streamin~.libs/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lmp3lame
As far as I understood lame-devel is not available in Fedora. How do I proceed?
András
On 09/27/2012 06:11 PM, András Murányi wrote:
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 6:47 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@at.or.atwrote:
On 09/27/2012 10:30 AM, András Murányi wrote:
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 1:20 AM, András Murányi muranyia@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans@at.or.at
wrote:
launchpad only builds packages for the Ubuntu releases, but you could
use
one of the Ubuntu packages on Debian if you find an Ubuntu release
that is
close to your Debian release.
I hear that OpenSUSE's build server will build Debian packages, but
I've
never used it. It would be very useful if someone set that up, I
think can
also build Fedora and SUSE packages.
I played around with OpenSUSE's OBS but it's not a success yet. It needs a something.spec file for building RPMs and a something.dsc
file
for DEBs. Both files serve to define a source package. For the spec file, I started from one well worked out for Planet CCRMA
by
Fernando Lopez-Lezcano. It's looking good for the OBS right now except
that
I'm struggling with the source definition, i.e. it doesn't seem to be
able
to grab the tar.gz from sourceforge. For the debian dsc file, I used Paul Brossier's one. The dsc is much simpler, but it cannot accept source urls, only local files. That's
where
OBS's so-called "Source Service" comes into the picture, which can
download
a tar.gz or even checkout an svn repo and tar.gz it for me. I'm
struggling
with this too, because (1) I'm unable to grab the resulting tar.gz from
the
dsc (it's created with an odd name that contains a colon) and (2) in the dsc an MD5 checksum of the tar.gz needs to be present which is unknown
in
the case of an archive newly created from SVN. I'll try to grow smarter with OBS, but in the meantime, any advice is highly appreciated. :)
Update: both source access problems are solved for now. The deb build at the moment is stuck at the point where it doesn't recognize the source package as a valid one. Dunno why. The rpm build got as far as where it would have needed mp3lame - seems
that
it's only available with Planet CCRMA (?). GEM builds fine. I'm playing around with conditionals for requires for different CPU capabilities, because OBS's spec file parser is somewhat limited. More news soon, hopefully.
Deb source packages are too tricky to create manually, use the Debian tools. If you are working from a git repo, like for puredata, the use "git-buildpackage -S". For any repo with the debian/ folder there, you can use "debuild -S"
You will need to change the debian/changelog to have your name and email in it, so that the signing part works, if opensuse requires signed packages. Launchpad, Debian, and Ubuntu all do.
At the very least, you'll want to do:
sudo apt-get install dpkg-dev devscripts debhelper cdbs
You can also download the source packages from the Debian or Ubuntu official packages, but they'll be signed by the original uploaders key. That wouldn't work with Launchpad but might with OBS, if it has looser signing restrictions.
Cool, I've actually paid less attention to the deb process on OBS knowing that it's already worked out and up-to-date somewhere else. I'll take a look at how I can reuse those packages. OBS doesn't need signed packages, an I haven't tried if it accepts packages signed by someone else.
It could be a useful way to provide Debian/squeeze packages.
If you want to try my new Pd-extended proper debian support, run:
$ ~/auto-build/pd-extended/scripts/auto-build/pd-extended-source-tarball.sh $ mv /tmp/Pd-extended_0.43.1~20120926-source.tar.bz2 ~/auto-build/pd-extended_0.43.1~20120926.orig.tar.bz2 $ cd ~/auto-build/pd-extended $ debuild -S -uc -us
Hm, I don't have this script yet in ~auto-build/ ... It seems it doesn't work if I just download it to any place along with its whole folder, but I cannot run it from the main run-automated-builder script either, because rsync cannot reach the server.
you need to get them from SVN:
cd ~/auto-build/pd-extended/scripts svn up cd .. svn up
The rsync method is gone for now, and perhaps permanently. I'm trying to see if I can make the cleaning process work without rsync.
(the -uc -us) means ignore the whole signing procedure, including the name in the debian/changelog)
Also, its great that you are taking on the spec file for RPMs! Once you
get 'puredata' working, then it would be very handy if you could make
one for the externals/template. Then it'll be easy to make RPMs for most of the libraries in Pd-extended, just like what's in Debian.
I've never made RPMs before, but I've done a lot of other packaging, so I'll help where I can.
Well, the deb thing is stuck at this line now:
dpkg-source: error: unrecognized file for a v1.0 source package: Pd-0.42.5-extended.tar.gz
The file is pulled from http://sourceforge.net/projects/pure-data/files/pd-extended/0.42.5/Pd-0.42.5... (It has a packages/linux_make/debian folder but still no good.) Is there a .tar.gz for pd-extended online which is suitable for deb packaging and I could link to it? I don't want to reinvent the wheel... BTW, Is there a Pd-0.42.5-extended-dev.deb (or alike) that I could study or use for parts?
The rpm is losing it here:
test -f /home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/Pd-0.42.5-extended/externals/unauthorized/mp3live~/../linux/mp3streamin~.libs && cat /home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/Pd-0.42.5-extended/externals/unauthorized/mp3live~/../linux/mp3streamin~.libs/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lmp3lameAs far as I understood lame-devel is not available in Fedora. How do I proceed?
András
For Debian/squeeze, we rely on the libmp3lame-dev that's in squeeze-backports. Previously, it was required that people downloaded it from deb-multimedia.org. I guess you'd need to get it from somewhere else, but I don't know enough about Fedora to say. Does PlanetCCRMA include lame? I think that would be the best place for dependencies.
I think it'll be a lot easier if you start with just 'puredata' and the libs based on the Library Template. Then once you get the hang of basic RPM packaging, you can take on the whole pd-extended, which can be painful. Also, I think that Pd-extended 0.43.1 will be a lot easier to package since I've fixed all of the problems that came up during the proper debian packaging.
.hc
I hear that OpenSUSE's build server will build Debian packages, but
I've
never used it. It would be very useful if someone set that up, I
think can
also build Fedora and SUSE packages.
I played around with OpenSUSE's OBS but it's not a success yet. It needs a something.spec file for building RPMs and a something.dsc
file
for DEBs. Both files serve to define a source package. For the spec file, I started from one well worked out for Planet CCRMA
by
Fernando Lopez-Lezcano. It's looking good for the OBS right now except
that
I'm struggling with the source definition, i.e. it doesn't seem to be
able
to grab the tar.gz from sourceforge. For the debian dsc file, I used Paul Brossier's one. The dsc is much simpler, but it cannot accept source urls, only local files. That's
where
OBS's so-called "Source Service" comes into the picture, which can
download
a tar.gz or even checkout an svn repo and tar.gz it for me. I'm
struggling
with this too, because (1) I'm unable to grab the resulting tar.gz
from
the
dsc (it's created with an odd name that contains a colon) and (2) in
the
dsc an MD5 checksum of the tar.gz needs to be present which is unknown
in
the case of an archive newly created from SVN. I'll try to grow smarter with OBS, but in the meantime, any advice is highly appreciated. :)
Update: both source access problems are solved for now. The deb build at the moment is stuck at the point where it doesn't recognize the source package as a valid one. Dunno why. The rpm build got as far as where it would have needed mp3lame - seems
that
it's only available with Planet CCRMA (?). GEM builds fine. I'm playing around with conditionals for requires for different CPU capabilities, because OBS's spec file parser is somewhat limited. More news soon, hopefully.
Deb source packages are too tricky to create manually, use the Debian tools. If you are working from a git repo, like for puredata, the use "git-buildpackage -S". For any repo with the debian/ folder there, you can use "debuild -S"
You will need to change the debian/changelog to have your name and email in it, so that the signing part works, if opensuse requires signed packages. Launchpad, Debian, and Ubuntu all do.
At the very least, you'll want to do:
sudo apt-get install dpkg-dev devscripts debhelper cdbs
You can also download the source packages from the Debian or Ubuntu official packages, but they'll be signed by the original uploaders key. That wouldn't work with Launchpad but might with OBS, if it has looser signing restrictions.
Cool, I've actually paid less attention to the deb process on OBS knowing that it's already worked out and up-to-date somewhere else. I'll take a look at how I can reuse those packages. OBS doesn't need signed packages, an I haven't tried if it accepts
packages
signed by someone else.
It could be a useful way to provide Debian/squeeze packages.
If you want to try my new Pd-extended proper debian support, run:
$
~/auto-build/pd-extended/scripts/auto-build/pd-extended-source-tarball.sh
$ mv /tmp/Pd-extended_0.43.1~20120926-source.tar.bz2 ~/auto-build/pd-extended_0.43.1~20120926.orig.tar.bz2 $ cd ~/auto-build/pd-extended $ debuild -S -uc -us
Hm, I don't have this script yet in ~auto-build/ ... It seems it doesn't work if I just download it to any place along with its whole folder, but
I
cannot run it from the main run-automated-builder script either, because rsync cannot reach the server.
you need to get them from SVN:
cd ~/auto-build/pd-extended/scripts svn up cd .. svn up
That did the trick! The script itself didn't succeed at the first run but the third run completed clean. And it deletes the file at the end so I needed to copy it before it finished :o)
The rsync method is gone for now, and perhaps permanently. I'm trying to see if I can make the cleaning process work without rsync.
(the -uc -us) means ignore the whole signing procedure, including the name in the debian/changelog)
Also, its great that you are taking on the spec file for RPMs! Once you
get 'puredata' working, then it would be very handy if you could make
one for the externals/template. Then it'll be easy to make RPMs for most of the libraries in Pd-extended, just like what's in Debian.
I've never made RPMs before, but I've done a lot of other packaging, so I'll help where I can.
Well, the deb thing is stuck at this line now:
dpkg-source: error: unrecognized file for a v1.0 source package: Pd-0.42.5-extended.tar.gz
The file is pulled from
http://sourceforge.net/projects/pure-data/files/pd-extended/0.42.5/Pd-0.42.5...
(It has a packages/linux_make/debian folder but still no good.) Is there a .tar.gz for pd-extended online which is suitable for deb packaging and I could link to it? I don't want to reinvent the wheel... BTW, Is there a Pd-0.42.5-extended-dev.deb (or alike) that I could study
or
use for parts?
The rpm is losing it here:
`test -f
/home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/Pd-0.42.5-extended/externals/unauthorized/mp3live~/../linux/mp3streamin~.libs
&& cat
/home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/Pd-0.42.5-extended/externals/unauthorized/mp3live~/../linux/mp3streamin~.libs`
/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lmp3lame
As far as I understood lame-devel is not available in Fedora. How do I proceed?
András
For Debian/squeeze, we rely on the libmp3lame-dev that's in squeeze-backports. Previously, it was required that people downloaded it from deb-multimedia.org. I guess you'd need to get it from somewhere else, but I don't know enough about Fedora to say. Does PlanetCCRMA include lame? I think that would be the best place for dependencies.
Planet CCRMA does have lame, but the OBS doesn't have Planet CCRMA. It is possible to fetch and build the lame sources into with pd but then we would have the lame binary bundled into pd which is not something we want, do we? So my best idea right now is to disable the external(s) that use lame.
I think it'll be a lot easier if you start with just 'puredata' and the libs based on the Library Template. Then once you get the hang of basic RPM packaging, you can take on the whole pd-extended, which can be painful. Also, I think that Pd-extended 0.43.1 will be a lot easier to package since I've fixed all of the problems that came up during the proper debian packaging.
Well... I'm actually enjoying RPM packaging, it's a nice compact thing with everything controlled from a single spec file, and at the moment the simpler way for me is to try to get pd-extended build, and to get into the Library Template, which I'm completely unfamiliar with, at a later point. The problems which I'm having are with some individual externals, but this way when I solve one, the next one comes up, so it's easy to go through all of them. At least I hope so. I'd even say: let me finish packaging 0.42.5-extended as a monolith now (according to the original topic), and let's do 0.43 with the Library Template approach later. Is that OK?
Again, I'm focusing more on the RPM side and I'd by happy if I could feed a debian-ready source tar.gz to the OBS, and I'd provide only the dsc. The less cool way is to upload a static file (like the one generated by pd-extended-source-tarball.sh), the more cool way would be to link to one which is online somewhere. Is there one?
András
On 09/28/2012 12:10 PM, András Murányi wrote:
It could be a useful way to provide Debian/squeeze packages.
If you want to try my new Pd-extended proper debian support, run:
$
~/auto-build/pd-extended/scripts/auto-build/pd-extended-source-tarball.sh
$ mv /tmp/Pd-extended_0.43.1~20120926-source.tar.bz2 ~/auto-build/pd-extended_0.43.1~20120926.orig.tar.bz2 $ cd ~/auto-build/pd-extended $ debuild -S -uc -us
Hm, I don't have this script yet in ~auto-build/ ... It seems it doesn't work if I just download it to any place along with its whole folder, but
I
cannot run it from the main run-automated-builder script either, because rsync cannot reach the server.
you need to get them from SVN:
cd ~/auto-build/pd-extended/scripts svn up cd .. svn up
That did the trick! The script itself didn't succeed at the first run but the third run completed clean. And it deletes the file at the end so I needed to copy it before it finished :o)
I just committed some fixes for that. :) But you can also get a source tarball that's generated each night:
http://blinky.at.or.at/auto-build/2012-09-28/
The rsync method is gone for now, and perhaps permanently. I'm trying to see if I can make the cleaning process work without rsync.
(the -uc -us) means ignore the whole signing procedure, including the name in the debian/changelog) Also, its great that you are taking on the spec file for RPMs! Once you
get 'puredata' working, then it would be very handy if you could make
one for the externals/template. Then it'll be easy to make RPMs for most of the libraries in Pd-extended, just like what's in Debian.
I've never made RPMs before, but I've done a lot of other packaging, so I'll help where I can.
Well, the deb thing is stuck at this line now:
dpkg-source: error: unrecognized file for a v1.0 source package: Pd-0.42.5-extended.tar.gz
The file is pulled from
http://sourceforge.net/projects/pure-data/files/pd-extended/0.42.5/Pd-0.42.5...
(It has a packages/linux_make/debian folder but still no good.) Is there a .tar.gz for pd-extended online which is suitable for deb packaging and I could link to it? I don't want to reinvent the wheel... BTW, Is there a Pd-0.42.5-extended-dev.deb (or alike) that I could study
or
use for parts?
The rpm is losing it here:
`test -f
/home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/Pd-0.42.5-extended/externals/unauthorized/mp3live~/../linux/mp3streamin~.libs
&& cat
/home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/Pd-0.42.5-extended/externals/unauthorized/mp3live~/../linux/mp3streamin~.libs`
/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lmp3lame
As far as I understood lame-devel is not available in Fedora. How do I proceed?
András
For Debian/squeeze, we rely on the libmp3lame-dev that's in squeeze-backports. Previously, it was required that people downloaded it from deb-multimedia.org. I guess you'd need to get it from somewhere else, but I don't know enough about Fedora to say. Does PlanetCCRMA include lame? I think that would be the best place for dependencies.
Planet CCRMA does have lame, but the OBS doesn't have Planet CCRMA. It is possible to fetch and build the lame sources into with pd but then we would have the lame binary bundled into pd which is not something we want, do we? So my best idea right now is to disable the external(s) that use lame.
That's easiest for now. I think only 'unauthorized' and maybe 'iemlib' require lame.
I think it'll be a lot easier if you start with just 'puredata' and the libs based on the Library Template. Then once you get the hang of basic RPM packaging, you can take on the whole pd-extended, which can be painful. Also, I think that Pd-extended 0.43.1 will be a lot easier to package since I've fixed all of the problems that came up during the proper debian packaging.
Well... I'm actually enjoying RPM packaging, it's a nice compact thing with everything controlled from a single spec file, and at the moment the simpler way for me is to try to get pd-extended build, and to get into the Library Template, which I'm completely unfamiliar with, at a later point. The problems which I'm having are with some individual externals, but this way when I solve one, the next one comes up, so it's easy to go through all of them. At least I hope so. I'd even say: let me finish packaging 0.42.5-extended as a monolith now (according to the original topic), and let's do 0.43 with the Library Template approach later. Is that OK?
Again, I'm focusing more on the RPM side and I'd by happy if I could feed a debian-ready source tar.gz to the OBS, and I'd provide only the dsc. The less cool way is to upload a static file (like the one generated by pd-extended-source-tarball.sh), the more cool way would be to link to one which is online somewhere. Is there one?
You should do it how you want to do it. I suggested starting with the library template because I think it would be a lot easier, since the Makefile was custom made to work well with Debian packaging by providing very standard names for commands "make clean", "make", "make install", "make dist", etc.
.hc
On 09/28/2012 03:24 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On 09/28/2012 12:10 PM, András Murányi wrote:
It could be a useful way to provide Debian/squeeze packages.
If you want to try my new Pd-extended proper debian support, run:
$
~/auto-build/pd-extended/scripts/auto-build/pd-extended-source-tarball.sh
$ mv /tmp/Pd-extended_0.43.1~20120926-source.tar.bz2 ~/auto-build/pd-extended_0.43.1~20120926.orig.tar.bz2 $ cd ~/auto-build/pd-extended $ debuild -S -uc -us
Hm, I don't have this script yet in ~auto-build/ ... It seems it doesn't work if I just download it to any place along with its whole folder, but
I
cannot run it from the main run-automated-builder script either, because rsync cannot reach the server.
you need to get them from SVN:
cd ~/auto-build/pd-extended/scripts svn up cd .. svn up
That did the trick! The script itself didn't succeed at the first run but the third run completed clean. And it deletes the file at the end so I needed to copy it before it finished :o)
I just committed some fixes for that. :) But you can also get a source tarball that's generated each night:
http://blinky.at.or.at/auto-build/2012-09-28/
The rsync method is gone for now, and perhaps permanently. I'm trying to see if I can make the cleaning process work without rsync.
(the -uc -us) means ignore the whole signing procedure, including the name in the debian/changelog) Also, its great that you are taking on the spec file for RPMs! Once you
get 'puredata' working, then it would be very handy if you could make
one for the externals/template. Then it'll be easy to make RPMs for most of the libraries in Pd-extended, just like what's in Debian.
I've never made RPMs before, but I've done a lot of other packaging, so I'll help where I can.
Well, the deb thing is stuck at this line now:
dpkg-source: error: unrecognized file for a v1.0 source package: Pd-0.42.5-extended.tar.gz
The file is pulled from
http://sourceforge.net/projects/pure-data/files/pd-extended/0.42.5/Pd-0.42.5...
(It has a packages/linux_make/debian folder but still no good.) Is there a .tar.gz for pd-extended online which is suitable for deb packaging and I could link to it? I don't want to reinvent the wheel... BTW, Is there a Pd-0.42.5-extended-dev.deb (or alike) that I could study
or
use for parts?
The rpm is losing it here:
`test -f
/home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/Pd-0.42.5-extended/externals/unauthorized/mp3live~/../linux/mp3streamin~.libs
&& cat
/home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/Pd-0.42.5-extended/externals/unauthorized/mp3live~/../linux/mp3streamin~.libs`
/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lmp3lame
As far as I understood lame-devel is not available in Fedora. How do I proceed?
András
For Debian/squeeze, we rely on the libmp3lame-dev that's in squeeze-backports. Previously, it was required that people downloaded it from deb-multimedia.org. I guess you'd need to get it from somewhere else, but I don't know enough about Fedora to say. Does PlanetCCRMA include lame? I think that would be the best place for dependencies.
Planet CCRMA does have lame, but the OBS doesn't have Planet CCRMA. It is possible to fetch and build the lame sources into with pd but then we would have the lame binary bundled into pd which is not something we want, do we? So my best idea right now is to disable the external(s) that use lame.
That's easiest for now. I think only 'unauthorized' and maybe 'iemlib' require lame.
I think it'll be a lot easier if you start with just 'puredata' and the libs based on the Library Template. Then once you get the hang of basic RPM packaging, you can take on the whole pd-extended, which can be painful. Also, I think that Pd-extended 0.43.1 will be a lot easier to package since I've fixed all of the problems that came up during the proper debian packaging.
Well... I'm actually enjoying RPM packaging, it's a nice compact thing with everything controlled from a single spec file, and at the moment the simpler way for me is to try to get pd-extended build, and to get into the Library Template, which I'm completely unfamiliar with, at a later point. The problems which I'm having are with some individual externals, but this way when I solve one, the next one comes up, so it's easy to go through all of them. At least I hope so. I'd even say: let me finish packaging 0.42.5-extended as a monolith now (according to the original topic), and let's do 0.43 with the Library Template approach later. Is that OK?
Again, I'm focusing more on the RPM side and I'd by happy if I could feed a debian-ready source tar.gz to the OBS, and I'd provide only the dsc. The less cool way is to upload a static file (like the one generated by pd-extended-source-tarball.sh), the more cool way would be to link to one which is online somewhere. Is there one?
You should do it how you want to do it. I suggested starting with the library template because I think it would be a lot easier, since the Makefile was custom made to work well with Debian packaging by providing very standard names for commands "make clean", "make", "make install", "make dist", etc.
.hc
Also, I started a wiki page to document the whole procesure of doing this using the new source tarballs:
http://puredata.info/docs/developer/BuildingYourOwnDebianPackage
.hc
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 9:24 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@at.or.atwrote:
On 09/28/2012 12:10 PM, András Murányi wrote:
It could be a useful way to provide Debian/squeeze packages.
If you want to try my new Pd-extended proper debian support, run:
$
~/auto-build/pd-extended/scripts/auto-build/pd-extended-source-tarball.sh
$ mv /tmp/Pd-extended_0.43.1~20120926-source.tar.bz2 ~/auto-build/pd-extended_0.43.1~20120926.orig.tar.bz2 $ cd ~/auto-build/pd-extended $ debuild -S -uc -us
Hm, I don't have this script yet in ~auto-build/ ... It seems it
doesn't
work if I just download it to any place along with its whole folder,
but
I
cannot run it from the main run-automated-builder script either,
because
rsync cannot reach the server.
you need to get them from SVN:
cd ~/auto-build/pd-extended/scripts svn up cd .. svn up
That did the trick! The script itself didn't succeed at the first run but the third run completed clean. And it deletes the file at the end so I needed to copy it before it finished :o)
I just committed some fixes for that. :) But you can also get a source tarball that's generated each night:
Cool. The only inconvenience is that the folder and the file name has the date so I cannot have the OBS pull the freshest one automatically. An url without "variables", like /auto-build/latest/Pd-extended_0.43.4-source.debian.tar.bz2 would do the trick...
BTW, would it be possible to make up the tar.gz which comes from sourceforge in a way that it has the proper /debian folder instead of the seemingly less proper /packages/linux_make/debian/? Why cannot it have all the superpower that the one from the auto-build repo has? Sorry, perhaps there is a reason, I'm just too dumb for this source package business yet.
Btw, /packages/redhat_rpm/pd-extended.spec in the source package seems outdated (Version: 0.39.2)... It's an earlier (2006) version of the spec file by Fernando Lopez-Lezcano. However, it has the advantage that it generates separate packages for the externals (if it still works), while the last (2010) version generated a core and an extra package only.
The rsync method is gone for now, and perhaps permanently. I'm trying to see if I can make the cleaning process work without rsync.
(the -uc -us) means ignore the whole signing procedure, including the name in the debian/changelog) Also, its great that you are taking on the spec file for RPMs! Once
you
get 'puredata' working, then it would be very handy if you could make
one for the externals/template. Then it'll be easy to make RPMs for most of the libraries in Pd-extended, just like what's in Debian.
I've never made RPMs before, but I've done a lot of other packaging,
so
I'll help where I can.
Well, the deb thing is stuck at this line now:
dpkg-source: error: unrecognized file for a v1.0 source package: Pd-0.42.5-extended.tar.gz
The file is pulled from
http://sourceforge.net/projects/pure-data/files/pd-extended/0.42.5/Pd-0.42.5...
(It has a packages/linux_make/debian folder but still no good.) Is there a .tar.gz for pd-extended online which is suitable for deb packaging and I could link to it? I don't want to reinvent the wheel... BTW, Is there a Pd-0.42.5-extended-dev.deb (or alike) that I could
study
or
use for parts?
The rpm is losing it here:
`test -f
/home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/Pd-0.42.5-extended/externals/unauthorized/mp3live~/../linux/mp3streamin~.libs
&& cat
/home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/Pd-0.42.5-extended/externals/unauthorized/mp3live~/../linux/mp3streamin~.libs`
/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lmp3lame
As far as I understood lame-devel is not available in Fedora. How do I proceed?
András
For Debian/squeeze, we rely on the libmp3lame-dev that's in squeeze-backports. Previously, it was required that people downloaded it from deb-multimedia.org. I guess you'd need to get it from
somewhere
else, but I don't know enough about Fedora to say. Does PlanetCCRMA include lame? I think that would be the best place for dependencies.
Planet CCRMA does have lame, but the OBS doesn't have Planet CCRMA. It is possible to fetch and build the lame sources into with pd but then
we
would have the lame binary bundled into pd which is not something we
want,
do we? So my best idea right now is to disable the external(s) that use lame.
That's easiest for now. I think only 'unauthorized' and maybe 'iemlib' require lame.
I've tried this in /externals/unauthorized/Makefile:
TARGETS=$(filter-out $(wildcard mp3*/*.*),$(TARGETS))
but it doesn't work. How can I effectively disable building /externals/unauthorized/mp3* ?
I think it'll be a lot easier if you start with just 'puredata' and the libs based on the Library Template. Then once you get the hang of basic RPM packaging, you can take on the whole pd-extended, which can be painful. Also, I think that Pd-extended 0.43.1 will be a lot easier to package since I've fixed all of the problems that came up during the proper debian packaging.
Well... I'm actually enjoying RPM packaging, it's a nice compact thing
with
everything controlled from a single spec file, and at the moment the simpler way for me is to try to get pd-extended build, and to get into
the
Library Template, which I'm completely unfamiliar with, at a later point. The problems which I'm having are with some individual externals, but
this
way when I solve one, the next one comes up, so it's easy to go through
all
of them. At least I hope so. I'd even say: let me finish packaging 0.42.5-extended as a monolith now (according to the original topic), and let's do 0.43 with the Library Template approach later. Is that OK?
Again, I'm focusing more on the RPM side and I'd by happy if I could
feed a
debian-ready source tar.gz to the OBS, and I'd provide only the dsc. The less cool way is to upload a static file (like the one generated by pd-extended-source-tarball.sh), the more cool way would be to link to one which is online somewhere. Is there one?
You should do it how you want to do it. I suggested starting with the library template because I think it would be a lot easier, since the Makefile was custom made to work well with Debian packaging by providing very standard names for commands "make clean", "make", "make install", "make dist", etc.
I've started to set up 0.43 too on the OBS and I'll definitely try to go into separating packages when I'm there.
I'll have to figure out how to handle the source (and MD5s!) for the debian builds and then I can evolve them along with the RPMs.
If anyone wants to join the party, of course I'll be happy to add them as admins.
András
On 10/16/2012 06:23 PM, András Murányi wrote:
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 9:24 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@at.or.atwrote:
On 09/28/2012 12:10 PM, András Murányi wrote:
It could be a useful way to provide Debian/squeeze packages.
If you want to try my new Pd-extended proper debian support, run:
$
~/auto-build/pd-extended/scripts/auto-build/pd-extended-source-tarball.sh
$ mv /tmp/Pd-extended_0.43.1~20120926-source.tar.bz2 ~/auto-build/pd-extended_0.43.1~20120926.orig.tar.bz2 $ cd ~/auto-build/pd-extended $ debuild -S -uc -us
Hm, I don't have this script yet in ~auto-build/ ... It seems it
doesn't
work if I just download it to any place along with its whole folder,
but
I
cannot run it from the main run-automated-builder script either,
because
rsync cannot reach the server.
you need to get them from SVN:
cd ~/auto-build/pd-extended/scripts svn up cd .. svn up
That did the trick! The script itself didn't succeed at the first run but the third run completed clean. And it deletes the file at the end so I needed to copy it before it finished :o)
I just committed some fixes for that. :) But you can also get a source tarball that's generated each night:
Cool. The only inconvenience is that the folder and the file name has the date so I cannot have the OBS pull the freshest one automatically. An url without "variables", like /auto-build/latest/Pd-extended_0.43.4-source.debian.tar.bz2 would do the trick...
I do this with a script in Jenkins:
#!/bin/sh
VERSION=0.43.4
DEBIAN_SOURCE_DATE=date +%Y%m%d
URL_DATE=date +%Y-%m-%d
ORIG=Pd-extended_${VERSION}~$DEBIAN_SOURCE_DATE-source.tar.bz2
DEBIAN=Pd-extended_${VERSION}~$DEBIAN_SOURCE_DATE-source.debian.tar.bz2
wget http://blinky.at.or.at:8888/auto-build/$URL_DATE/$%7BORIG%7D
wget http://blinky.at.or.at:8888/auto-build/$URL_DATE/$%7BORIG%7D.md5
wget http://blinky.at.or.at:8888/auto-build/$URL_DATE/$%7BDEBIAN%7D
wget http://blinky.at.or.at:8888/auto-build/$URL_DATE/$%7BDEBIAN%7D.md5
md5sum -c ${ORIG}.md5
md5sum -c ${DEBIAN}.md5
ln -s $ORIG echo $ORIG | sed 's,^P,p,' | sed 's,-source,.orig,'
tar xjf ${ORIG}
cd pd-extended
tar xjf ../${DEBIAN}
debuild -uc -us
BTW, would it be possible to make up the tar.gz which comes from sourceforge in a way that it has the proper /debian folder instead of the seemingly less proper /packages/linux_make/debian/? Why cannot it have all the superpower that the one from the auto-build repo has? Sorry, perhaps there is a reason, I'm just too dumb for this source package business yet.
Done :) That's what the Pd-extended*-source.debian.tar.bz2 tarball is. Its also checked into pure-data SVN in the pd-extended/0.43 branch, and will ultimately wind up in trunk/debian.
Btw, /packages/redhat_rpm/pd-extended.spec in the source package seems outdated (Version: 0.39.2)... It's an earlier (2006) version of the spec file by Fernando Lopez-Lezcano. However, it has the advantage that it generates separate packages for the externals (if it still works), while the last (2010) version generated a core and an extra package only.
yeah, that's quite old. Can you get the latest from Fernando?
The rsync method is gone for now, and perhaps permanently. I'm trying to see if I can make the cleaning process work without rsync.
(the -uc -us) means ignore the whole signing procedure, including the name in the debian/changelog) Also, its great that you are taking on the spec file for RPMs! Once
you
get 'puredata' working, then it would be very handy if you could make
one for the externals/template. Then it'll be easy to make RPMs for most of the libraries in Pd-extended, just like what's in Debian.
I've never made RPMs before, but I've done a lot of other packaging,
so
I'll help where I can.
Well, the deb thing is stuck at this line now:
dpkg-source: error: unrecognized file for a v1.0 source package: Pd-0.42.5-extended.tar.gz
The file is pulled from
http://sourceforge.net/projects/pure-data/files/pd-extended/0.42.5/Pd-0.42.5...
(It has a packages/linux_make/debian folder but still no good.) Is there a .tar.gz for pd-extended online which is suitable for deb packaging and I could link to it? I don't want to reinvent the wheel... BTW, Is there a Pd-0.42.5-extended-dev.deb (or alike) that I could
study
or
use for parts?
The rpm is losing it here:
`test -f
/home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/Pd-0.42.5-extended/externals/unauthorized/mp3live~/../linux/mp3streamin~.libs
&& cat
/home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/Pd-0.42.5-extended/externals/unauthorized/mp3live~/../linux/mp3streamin~.libs`
/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lmp3lame
As far as I understood lame-devel is not available in Fedora. How do I proceed?
András
For Debian/squeeze, we rely on the libmp3lame-dev that's in squeeze-backports. Previously, it was required that people downloaded it from deb-multimedia.org. I guess you'd need to get it from
somewhere
else, but I don't know enough about Fedora to say. Does PlanetCCRMA include lame? I think that would be the best place for dependencies.
Planet CCRMA does have lame, but the OBS doesn't have Planet CCRMA. It is possible to fetch and build the lame sources into with pd but then
we
would have the lame binary bundled into pd which is not something we
want,
do we? So my best idea right now is to disable the external(s) that use lame.
That's easiest for now. I think only 'unauthorized' and maybe 'iemlib' require lame.
I've tried this in /externals/unauthorized/Makefile:
TARGETS=$(filter-out $(wildcard mp3*/*.*),$(TARGETS))
but it doesn't work. How can I effectively disable building /externals/unauthorized/mp3* ?
Try adding a test target to see why its not working:
showtargets: echo "TARGETS $(TARGETS)" echo "filter-out: $(filter-out $(wildcard mp3*/*.*),$(TARGETS))" echo "mp3: $(wildcard mp3*/*.*)"
I think it'll be a lot easier if you start with just 'puredata' and the libs based on the Library Template. Then once you get the hang of basic RPM packaging, you can take on the whole pd-extended, which can be painful. Also, I think that Pd-extended 0.43.1 will be a lot easier to package since I've fixed all of the problems that came up during the proper debian packaging.
Well... I'm actually enjoying RPM packaging, it's a nice compact thing
with
everything controlled from a single spec file, and at the moment the simpler way for me is to try to get pd-extended build, and to get into
the
Library Template, which I'm completely unfamiliar with, at a later point. The problems which I'm having are with some individual externals, but
this
way when I solve one, the next one comes up, so it's easy to go through
all
of them. At least I hope so. I'd even say: let me finish packaging 0.42.5-extended as a monolith now (according to the original topic), and let's do 0.43 with the Library Template approach later. Is that OK?
Again, I'm focusing more on the RPM side and I'd by happy if I could
feed a
debian-ready source tar.gz to the OBS, and I'd provide only the dsc. The less cool way is to upload a static file (like the one generated by pd-extended-source-tarball.sh), the more cool way would be to link to one which is online somewhere. Is there one?
You should do it how you want to do it. I suggested starting with the library template because I think it would be a lot easier, since the Makefile was custom made to work well with Debian packaging by providing very standard names for commands "make clean", "make", "make install", "make dist", etc.
I've started to set up 0.43 too on the OBS and I'll definitely try to go into separating packages when I'm there.
I'll have to figure out how to handle the source (and MD5s!) for the debian builds and then I can evolve them along with the RPMs.
If anyone wants to join the party, of course I'll be happy to add them as admins.
Is there a link to the OBS service so we can see it?
.hc
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 2:04 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@at.or.atwrote:
On 10/16/2012 06:23 PM, András Murányi wrote:
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 9:24 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans@at.or.at wrote:
On 09/28/2012 12:10 PM, András Murányi wrote:
It could be a useful way to provide Debian/squeeze packages.
> If you want to try my new Pd-extended proper debian support, run: > > $
~/auto-build/pd-extended/scripts/auto-build/pd-extended-source-tarball.sh
> $ mv /tmp/Pd-extended_0.43.1~20120926-source.tar.bz2 > ~/auto-build/pd-extended_0.43.1~20120926.orig.tar.bz2 > $ cd ~/auto-build/pd-extended > $ debuild -S -uc -us > Hm, I don't have this script yet in ~auto-build/ ... It seems it
doesn't
work if I just download it to any place along with its whole folder,
but
I
cannot run it from the main run-automated-builder script either,
because
rsync cannot reach the server.
you need to get them from SVN:
cd ~/auto-build/pd-extended/scripts svn up cd .. svn up
That did the trick! The script itself didn't succeed at the first run but the third run completed clean. And it deletes the file at the end so I needed to copy it before it finished :o)
I just committed some fixes for that. :) But you can also get a source tarball that's generated each night:
Cool. The only inconvenience is that the folder and the file name has the date so I cannot have the OBS pull the freshest one automatically. An url without "variables", like /auto-build/latest/Pd-extended_0.43.4-source.debian.tar.bz2 would do the trick...
I do this with a script in Jenkins:
#!/bin/sh
VERSION=0.43.4 DEBIAN_SOURCE_DATE=
date +%Y%m%dURL_DATE=date +%Y-%m-%dORIG=Pd-extended_${VERSION}~$DEBIAN_SOURCE_DATE-source.tar.bz2 DEBIAN=Pd-extended_${VERSION}~$DEBIAN_SOURCE_DATE-source.debian.tar.bz2wget http://blinky.at.or.at:8888/auto-build/$URL_DATE/$%7BORIG%7D wget http://blinky.at.or.at:8888/auto-build/$URL_DATE/$%7BORIG%7D.md5 wget http://blinky.at.or.at:8888/auto-build/$URL_DATE/$%7BDEBIAN%7D wget http://blinky.at.or.at:8888/auto-build/$URL_DATE/$%7BDEBIAN%7D.md5 md5sumhttp://blinky.at.or.at:8888/auto-build/$URL_DATE/$%7BDEBIAN%7D.md5md5sum-c ${ORIG}.md5 md5sum -c ${DEBIAN}.md5 ln -s $ORIG
echo $ORIG | sed 's,^P,p,' | sed 's,-source,.orig,'tar xjf ${ORIG} cd pd-extended tar xjf ../${DEBIAN} debuild -uc -us
Eh, I don't see a way do do this on the OBS. For the record, these are the operations allowed on sources:
Convert non-tar-archives to tar.gz Automated packaging of via maven central Download files as specified in spec file Create spec file for cpan sources Extract files from archive Verify a file Create a tar ball from SCM repository Updates version in spec file Change File Compression Download and extract a src.rpm Update sources Download a file Validate sources Format the spec files
The source has to be either online with a static name, or in an SCM tree, or a statically uploaded file. I think I'll have to go with the latter now.
BTW, would it be possible to make up the tar.gz which comes from sourceforge in a way that it has the proper /debian folder instead of the seemingly less proper /packages/linux_make/debian/? Why cannot it have
all
the superpower that the one from the auto-build repo has? Sorry, perhaps there is a reason, I'm just too dumb for this source package business
yet.
Done :) That's what the Pd-extended*-source.debian.tar.bz2 tarball is. Its also checked into pure-data SVN in the pd-extended/0.43 branch, and will ultimately wind up in trunk/debian.
Btw, /packages/redhat_rpm/pd-extended.spec in the source package seems outdated (Version: 0.39.2)... It's an earlier (2006) version of the spec file by Fernando Lopez-Lezcano. However, it has the advantage that it generates separate packages for the externals (if it still works), while the last (2010) version generated a core and an extra package only.
yeah, that's quite old. Can you get the latest from Fernando?
The latest is the 2010 one which he used with FC17/PlanetCCRMA, which I used as a template for the OBS. Find it in the source RPM here: http://rpm.pbone.net/index.php3/stat/4/idpl/18289555/dir/fedora_17/com/pd-ex...
Again, this creates a core package plus a separate "extra" package. If you prefer the monolithic package and some improvements, use mine from the OBS (address at the end of the mail).
The rsync method is gone for now, and perhaps permanently. I'm trying to see if I can make the cleaning process work without rsync.
> (the -uc -us) means ignore the whole signing procedure, including
the
> name in the debian/changelog) > Also, its great that you are taking on the spec file for RPMs! Once
you
get 'puredata' working, then it would be very handy if you could make > one for the externals/template. Then it'll be easy to make RPMs for > most of the libraries in Pd-extended, just like what's in Debian. > > I've never made RPMs before, but I've done a lot of other packaging,
so
> I'll help where I can. > Well, the deb thing is stuck at this line now:
> dpkg-source: error: unrecognized file for a v1.0 source package: > Pd-0.42.5-extended.tar.gz > The file is pulled from
http://sourceforge.net/projects/pure-data/files/pd-extended/0.42.5/Pd-0.42.5...
(It has a packages/linux_make/debian folder but still no good.) Is there a .tar.gz for pd-extended online which is suitable for deb packaging and I could link to it? I don't want to reinvent the
wheel...
BTW, Is there a Pd-0.42.5-extended-dev.deb (or alike) that I could
study
or
use for parts?
The rpm is losing it here:
> `test -f >
/home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/Pd-0.42.5-extended/externals/unauthorized/mp3live~/../linux/mp3streamin~.libs
> && cat >
/home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/Pd-0.42.5-extended/externals/unauthorized/mp3live~/../linux/mp3streamin~.libs`
> /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lmp3lame > As far as I understood lame-devel is not available in Fedora. How do
I
proceed?
András
For Debian/squeeze, we rely on the libmp3lame-dev that's in squeeze-backports. Previously, it was required that people downloaded it from deb-multimedia.org. I guess you'd need to get it from
somewhere
else, but I don't know enough about Fedora to say. Does PlanetCCRMA include lame? I think that would be the best place for dependencies.
Planet CCRMA does have lame, but the OBS doesn't have Planet CCRMA. It is possible to fetch and build the lame sources into with pd but
then
we
would have the lame binary bundled into pd which is not something we
want,
do we? So my best idea right now is to disable the external(s) that use lame.
That's easiest for now. I think only 'unauthorized' and maybe 'iemlib' require lame.
I've tried this in /externals/unauthorized/Makefile:
TARGETS=$(filter-out $(wildcard mp3*/*.*),$(TARGETS))
but it doesn't work. How can I effectively disable building /externals/unauthorized/mp3* ?
Try adding a test target to see why its not working:
showtargets: echo "TARGETS $(TARGETS)" echo "filter-out: $(filter-out $(wildcard mp3*/*.*),$(TARGETS))" echo "mp3: $(wildcard mp3*/*.*)"
Thanks for the tip! Turned out that wildcard is not like sed, but it always works on the file list of the working directory, so it has to be used earlier, like this: TARGETS=$(subst .tk,.tk2c,$(wildcard */*.tk)) $(subst .c,.$(EXT),$(filter-out $(wildcard mp3*/*.*),$(wildcard */*.c)))
This sets TARGETS as desired but the mp3 externals are still built - it seems that they are enumerated long before /externals/unauthorized/Makefile is used. (see https://build.opensuse.org/package/rawlog?arch=i586&package=pd-extended&...) I shall test if this is OBS specific.
I think it'll be a lot easier if you start with just 'puredata' and
the
libs based on the Library Template. Then once you get the hang of
basic
RPM packaging, you can take on the whole pd-extended, which can be painful. Also, I think that Pd-extended 0.43.1 will be a lot easier
to
package since I've fixed all of the problems that came up during the proper debian packaging.
Well... I'm actually enjoying RPM packaging, it's a nice compact thing
with
everything controlled from a single spec file, and at the moment the simpler way for me is to try to get pd-extended build, and to get into
the
Library Template, which I'm completely unfamiliar with, at a later
point.
The problems which I'm having are with some individual externals, but
this
way when I solve one, the next one comes up, so it's easy to go through
all
of them. At least I hope so. I'd even say: let me finish packaging 0.42.5-extended as a monolith now (according to the original topic), and let's do 0.43 with the Library Template approach later. Is that OK?
Again, I'm focusing more on the RPM side and I'd by happy if I could
feed a
debian-ready source tar.gz to the OBS, and I'd provide only the dsc.
The
less cool way is to upload a static file (like the one generated by pd-extended-source-tarball.sh), the more cool way would be to link to
one
which is online somewhere. Is there one?
You should do it how you want to do it. I suggested starting with the library template because I think it would be a lot easier, since the Makefile was custom made to work well with Debian packaging by providing very standard names for commands "make clean", "make", "make install", "make dist", etc.
I've started to set up 0.43 too on the OBS and I'll definitely try to go into separating packages when I'm there.
I'll have to figure out how to handle the source (and MD5s!) for the
debian
builds and then I can evolve them along with the RPMs.
If anyone wants to join the party, of course I'll be happy to add them as admins.
Is there a link to the OBS service so we can see it?
For 0.42.5: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show?package=pd-extended&project=home... For 0.43 (not much to see there yet): https://build.opensuse.org/package/show?package=pd-extended_0.43&project... I can add you to the project by OBS user name.
András
On 09/26/2012 07:20 PM, András Murányi wrote:
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@at.or.atwrote:
launchpad only builds packages for the Ubuntu releases, but you could use one of the Ubuntu packages on Debian if you find an Ubuntu release that is close to your Debian release.
I hear that OpenSUSE's build server will build Debian packages, but I've never used it. It would be very useful if someone set that up, I think can also build Fedora and SUSE packages.
I played around with OpenSUSE's OBS but it's not a success yet. It needs a something.spec file for building RPMs and a something.dsc file for DEBs. Both files serve to define a source package. For the spec file, I started from one well worked out for Planet CCRMA by Fernando Lopez-Lezcano. It's looking good for the OBS right now except that I'm struggling with the source definition, i.e. it doesn't seem to be able to grab the tar.gz from sourceforge. For the debian dsc file, I used Paul Brossier's one. The dsc is much simpler, but it cannot accept source urls, only local files. That's where OBS's so-called "Source Service" comes into the picture, which can download a tar.gz or even checkout an svn repo and tar.gz it for me. I'm struggling with this too, because (1) I'm unable to grab the resulting tar.gz from the dsc (it's created with an odd name that contains a colon) and (2) in the dsc an MD5 checksum of the tar.gz needs to be present which is unknown in the case of an archive newly created from SVN. I'll try to grow smarter with OBS, but in the meantime, any advice is highly appreciated. :)
András
Also, its great that you are taking on the spec file for RPMs! Once you get 'puredata' working, then it would be very handy if you could make one for the externals/template. Then it'll be easy to make RPMs for most of the libraries in Pd-extended, just like what's in Debian.
I've never made RPMs before, but I've done a lot of other packaging, so I'll help where I can.
.hc
Greets Hans
I'm testing your new version in ubuntu 12.04 64bit. However when I add the ppa and the deb line and do an "sudo apt-get update" the ubuntu software center does not find it. Any idea why?
Aloha Rick
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@at.or.atwrote:
Back in Jan/Feb, I put together a pd-extended.deb package that uses the normal process for building .deb packages rather than the crazy hack that normally builds the Pd-extended .deb packages. I finally worked out the final kinks, and there are now working packages for Ubuntu i386 and amd64 for Lucid and Maverick.
Doing it this way means that anyone can build it using launchpad, opensuse build, or any other standard method. That means its easy to support both i386/amd64 32-bit/64-bit on Ubuntu lucid, maverick, natty, oneiric, precise, and quantal.
I just uploaded builds for Hardy, Jaunty, Karmic, Lucid, Natty, Oneiric, Precise, and Quantal. Hopefully those all build. If this works out, then I'm going to switch all .deb building to this method.
So please test these packages and let me know if they work for you!
https://launchpad.net/~eighthave/+archive/pd-extended
.hc
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Have a look at https://launchpad.net/~eighthave/+archive/pd-extended/+packages : Precise and Oneiric versions failed to build, so synaptic cannot show you any installable version.
On 28/09/2012 19:07, Rick T wrote:
Greets Hans
I'm testing your new version in ubuntu 12.04 64bit. However when I add the ppa and the deb line and do an "sudo apt-get update" the ubuntu software center does not find it. Any idea why?
Aloha Rick
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans@at.or.at mailto:hans@at.or.at> wrote:
Back in Jan/Feb, I put together a pd-extended.deb package that uses the normal process for building .deb packages rather than the crazy hack that normally builds the Pd-extended .deb packages. I finally worked out the final kinks, and there are now working packages for Ubuntu i386 and amd64 for Lucid and Maverick. Doing it this way means that anyone can build it using launchpad, opensuse build, or any other standard method. That means its easy to support both i386/amd64 32-bit/64-bit on Ubuntu lucid, maverick, natty, oneiric, precise, and quantal. I just uploaded builds for Hardy, Jaunty, Karmic, Lucid, Natty, Oneiric, Precise, and Quantal. Hopefully those all build. If this works out, then I'm going to switch all .deb building to this method. So please test these packages and let me know if they work for you! https://launchpad.net/~eighthave/+archive/pd-extended <https://launchpad.net/%7Eeighthave/+archive/pd-extended> .hc _______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at <mailto:Pd-list@iem.at> mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Thanks ;-)
Aloha Rick
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 8:32 AM, batinste dwanafite@yahoo.fr wrote:
Have a look at https://launchpad.net/~eighthave/+archive/pd-extended/+packages : Precise and Oneiric versions failed to build, so synaptic cannot show you any installable version.
On 28/09/2012 19:07, Rick T wrote:
Greets Hans
I'm testing your new version in ubuntu 12.04 64bit. However when I add the ppa and the deb line and do an "sudo apt-get update" the ubuntu software center does not find it. Any idea why?
Aloha Rick
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@at.or.atwrote:
Back in Jan/Feb, I put together a pd-extended.deb package that uses the normal process for building .deb packages rather than the crazy hack that normally builds the Pd-extended .deb packages. I finally worked out the final kinks, and there are now working packages for Ubuntu i386 and amd64 for Lucid and Maverick.
Doing it this way means that anyone can build it using launchpad, opensuse build, or any other standard method. That means its easy to support both i386/amd64 32-bit/64-bit on Ubuntu lucid, maverick, natty, oneiric, precise, and quantal.
I just uploaded builds for Hardy, Jaunty, Karmic, Lucid, Natty, Oneiric, Precise, and Quantal. Hopefully those all build. If this works out, then I'm going to switch all .deb building to this method.
So please test these packages and let me know if they work for you!
https://launchpad.net/~eighthave/+archive/pd-extendedhttps://launchpad.net/%7Eeighthave/+archive/pd-extended
.hc
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
_______________________________________________Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Yup, exactly. I'm working on getting it working on oneiric and precise... those two will definitely be included.
.hc
On 09/28/2012 02:32 PM, batinste wrote:
Have a look at https://launchpad.net/~eighthave/+archive/pd-extended/+packages : Precise and Oneiric versions failed to build, so synaptic cannot show you any installable version.
On 28/09/2012 19:07, Rick T wrote:
Greets Hans
I'm testing your new version in ubuntu 12.04 64bit. However when I add the ppa and the deb line and do an "sudo apt-get update" the ubuntu software center does not find it. Any idea why?
Aloha Rick
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans@at.or.at mailto:hans@at.or.at> wrote:
Back in Jan/Feb, I put together a pd-extended.deb package that uses the normal process for building .deb packages rather than the crazy hack that normally builds the Pd-extended .deb packages. I finallyworked out the final kinks, and there are now working packages for Ubuntu i386 and amd64 for Lucid and Maverick.
Doing it this way means that anyone can build it using launchpad, opensuse build, or any other standard method. That means itseasy to support both i386/amd64 32-bit/64-bit on Ubuntu lucid, maverick, natty, oneiric, precise, and quantal.
I just uploaded builds for Hardy, Jaunty, Karmic, Lucid, Natty, Oneiric, Precise, and Quantal. Hopefully those all build. If this works out, then I'm going to switch all .deb building to this method. So please test these packages and let me know if they work for you! https://launchpad.net/~eighthave/+archive/pd-extended <https://launchpad.net/%7Eeighthave/+archive/pd-extended> .hc _______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at <mailto:Pd-list@iem.at> mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-
András Murányi -
batinste -
Billy Stiltner -
dreamer -
Hans-Christoph Steiner -
Jonathan Wilkes -
Rick T