Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 12:45:51 +0100 From: IOhannes m zmoelnig zmoelnig@iem.at To: pd-list@lists.iem.at Subject: Re: [PD] pd-extended keeps losing track of extras Message-ID: 56DEBB6F.5070208@iem.at Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
On 2016-03-08 12:05, oli_kester wrote:
I'm using pd-extended 0.43.4
...sigh...¹ ¹ http://lists.puredata.info/search?P=Pd-extended&DEFAULTOP=and&G=pd-l...
Not sure what this is supposed to articulate - do you mean to say that the extras are no longer supported, and I shouldn't expect them to work properly? Explain please :)
on 64-bit Xubuntu 14.04 LTS. This isn't to do with the issues pd-extended has running on 64-bit Linux is it?
no. there are virtually no issues² with Pd-extended on 64-bit linux, regardless of what the splash-screen says (the existance of the splash-screen is probably the biggest issue with 64-bit).
² let's put it this way: there are not significantly more issues on 64-bit than there are on 32-bit systems.
Good to hear the issues with 64-bit builds are not significant, that message actually put me off using it on Linux the first time I opened it!
Maybe only warn when someone attempts to add a potentially flaky plugin?
Cheers,
Oli
On 2016-03-08 12:05, oli_kester wrote:
I'm using pd-extended 0.43.4
...sigh...¹ ¹ http://lists.puredata.info/search?P=Pd-extended&DEFAULTOP=and&G=pd-l...
Not sure what this is supposed to articulate - do you mean to say that the extras are no longer supported,
and I shouldn't expect them to work properly? Explain please :)
just sharing my personal experience here:
when i picked up PD again a few weeks ago, i first was excited about the PD-extended distribution. However, as the puredata.info site says, this project is unmaintained and considered outdated.
i too experienced the difficulties your described with PD-extended, and after reading through the list, i got the overall impression, that PD-extended should be avoided in general.
i don't know the exact historical or technical reasons, but i decided to listen to the PD guru's advice. my actual setup consists of the latest PD-vanilla and whatever externals i REALLY need. since ZEXY and IEMLIB is maintained by the IEM people (who are probably the strongest and longest serving backbone in the PD department) i figure they are pretty save to use even for future PD releases.
that said, as a matter of fact i do use compiled .dlls from the last windows PD-extended version, always specifiying search paths in the PD startup script. as long as they work ... good, but i'm aware that this is not rock solid and i try to use them as little as possible and rather patch my own abstractions for specific needs with vanilla objects.
just my 2c
best
oliver
Just randomly a student will say that many objects have
red boxes and failed to load. And yes, even core objects like [dac~] and [print]. The "answer" is to restart. At some point Hans got the idea to break out the internal objects into a library called "vanilla". By default if you don't load any libraries you would have to do [import vanilla] to get anything at all to instantiate. So the 0.001% of users who don't want to load the internal objects get maximum control over Pd, while everyone else must do more typing to get anything at all to happen. I'm going to speculate that one of your students somehow downloaded a Pd-extended binary built after he made that change. At least I hope that's what happened, because Pd Vanilla loads the internal classes through a simple series of function calls. If you can mouse around in a patch and create empty objects, you can create internal objects. -Jonathan
On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 11:09 AM, oliver <oliver@klingt.org> wrote:
On 2016-03-08 12:05, oli_kester wrote:
I'm using pd-extended 0.43.4
...sigh...¹ ¹ http://lists.puredata.info/search?P=Pd-extended&DEFAULTOP=and&G=pd-l...
Not sure what this is supposed to articulate - do you mean to say that the extras are no longer supported,
and I shouldn't expect them to work properly? Explain please :)
just sharing my personal experience here:
when i picked up PD again a few weeks ago, i first was excited about the PD-extended distribution. However, as the puredata.info site says, this project is unmaintained and considered outdated.
i too experienced the difficulties your described with PD-extended, and after reading through the list, i got the overall impression, that PD-extended should be avoided in general.
i don't know the exact historical or technical reasons, but i decided to listen to the PD guru's advice. my actual setup consists of the latest PD-vanilla and whatever externals i REALLY need. since ZEXY and IEMLIB is maintained by the IEM people (who are probably the strongest and longest serving backbone in the PD department) i figure they are pretty save to use even for future PD releases.
that said, as a matter of fact i do use compiled .dlls from the last windows PD-extended version, always specifiying search paths in the PD startup script. as long as they work ... good, but i'm aware that this is not rock solid and i try to use them as little as possible and rather patch my own abstractions for specific needs with vanilla objects.
just my 2c
best
oliver
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-
Jonathan Wilkes -
oli_kester -
oliver