especially, wouldnt it be possible to port it to mac os x? what is the most problematic part to port? the 'base part' or the 'gui part'?
as far as the 'gui part' goes, what ever happened to the gtk gui?
Well well, that raises the following question: Would it be too difficult to port pd to the MacOS system?
Using portaudio there would at least be a common audio layer for different kinds of platforms....
Actually, assuming you have Tk ( a reasonable assumption, now that there is a) a rootless XFree86 build available and b) a dylib of Tk that runs under X-Windows), one could simply compile the 'gui part.'
As far as the base, I would start with Karl MacMillan's FreeBSD port. (I have to admit, I haven't seen his port; my comments are based on the IRIX version, from around 0.32. But, the Mac OS UNIX layer is based on 4.4BSD, so his version would be the closest) You need to rewrite the module loading section to use dylib, and alter some timing related things in the scheduler.
Then, one could use CoreAudio/CoreMIDI for the audio and MIDI portions.
So, I guess the answer to your question is: the base part.
florian wrote:
especially, wouldnt it be possible to port it to mac os x? what is the most problematic part to port? the 'base part' or the 'gui part'?
as far as the 'gui part' goes, what ever happened to the gtk gui?
Well well, that raises the following question: Would it be too difficult to port pd to the MacOS system?
Using portaudio there would at least be a common audio layer for different kinds of platforms....
--
i don't mean to be a snag here - but could someone explain the quest to port PD to the MacOS? especially with such an established community of MaxMSP users - is it the evil twin syndrome or... for me the great benefit of PD is that under LINUX it is provides all the benefits of MaxMSP without being bound to the tides of the economically inflated Mac platform.
Is it that you have an unnegotiably strong affinity with both MacOS and PD, in that you would like to see them conjoined? eg: what are the advantages other than the noble cause of the open software movement - i mean, considering the history of MaxMSP and PD, a port is a pretty ironic don't you think? i guess i can appreciate a port in that context ; )
de|
_ / a -> b, b ->c, a -> d, d -> c ...and so on...\ _
----- Original Message ----- From: "John Lawter" lawter@codefab.com To: pd-list@iem.kug.ac.at Sent: Friday, 27 July 2001 12:09 Subject: Re: [PD] mac
Actually, assuming you have Tk ( a reasonable assumption, now that there is a) a rootless XFree86 build available and b) a dylib of Tk that runs under X-Windows), one could simply compile the 'gui part.'
As far as the base, I would start with Karl MacMillan's FreeBSD port. (I have to admit, I haven't seen his port; my comments are based on the IRIX version, from around 0.32. But, the Mac OS UNIX layer is based on 4.4BSD, so his version would be the closest) You need to rewrite the module loading section to use dylib, and alter some timing related things in the scheduler.
Then, one could use CoreAudio/CoreMIDI for the audio and MIDI portions.
So, I guess the answer to your question is: the base part.
florian wrote:
especially, wouldnt it be possible to port it to mac os x? what is the most problematic part to port? the 'base part' or the 'gui part'?
as far as the 'gui part' goes, what ever happened to the gtk gui?
Well well, that raises the following question: Would it be too difficult to port pd to the MacOS system?
Using portaudio there would at least be a common audio layer for
different
kinds of platforms....
--
Well, speaking only for myself: I am working on a port simply for my own amusement, and to learn CoreAudio. Pd also provides a neat framework to develop ideas of my own.
Irony would be back-porting it to run on a Cube with the IRCAM DSP board under Nextstep 3.0.
delire wrote:
i don't mean to be a snag here - but could someone explain the quest to port PD to the MacOS? especially with such an established community of MaxMSP users - is it the evil twin syndrome or... for me the great benefit of PD is that under LINUX it is provides all the benefits of MaxMSP without being bound to the tides of the economically inflated Mac platform.
Is it that you have an unnegotiably strong affinity with both MacOS and PD, in that you would like to see them conjoined? eg: what are the advantages other than the noble cause of the open software movement - i mean, considering the history of MaxMSP and PD, a port is a pretty ironic don't you think? i guess i can appreciate a port in that context ; )
de|
_ / a -> b, b ->c, a -> d, d -> c ...and so on...\ _
----- Original Message ----- From: "John Lawter" lawter@codefab.com To: pd-list@iem.kug.ac.at Sent: Friday, 27 July 2001 12:09 Subject: Re: [PD] mac
Actually, assuming you have Tk ( a reasonable assumption, now that there is a) a rootless XFree86 build available and b) a dylib of Tk that runs under X-Windows), one could simply compile the 'gui part.'
As far as the base, I would start with Karl MacMillan's FreeBSD port. (I have to admit, I haven't seen his port; my comments are based on the IRIX version, from around 0.32. But, the Mac OS UNIX layer is based on 4.4BSD, so his version would be the closest) You need to rewrite the module loading section to use dylib, and alter some timing related things in the scheduler.
Then, one could use CoreAudio/CoreMIDI for the audio and MIDI portions.
So, I guess the answer to your question is: the base part.
florian wrote:
especially, wouldnt it be possible to port it to mac os x? what is the most problematic part to port? the 'base part' or the 'gui part'?
as far as the 'gui part' goes, what ever happened to the gtk gui?
Well well, that raises the following question: Would it be too difficult to port pd to the MacOS system?
Using portaudio there would at least be a common audio layer for
different
kinds of platforms....
--
There's a prosaic reason to want to port to Mac: sometimes you walk into a studio or concert hall and find only a Mac there. If you're a Pd user, you'd want to just run your music on the Mac...
I've already started on a port, using PortAudio; I don't know about CoreAudio/CoreMidi. But I think it's pointless until TK comes along for OSX, and we can't predict when that will become available, although I don't think more than a few months from now.
cheers Miller
On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 11:03:45AM -0400, John Lawter wrote:
Well, speaking only for myself: I am working on a port simply for my own amusement, and to learn CoreAudio. Pd also provides a neat framework to develop ideas of my own.
Irony would be back-porting it to run on a Cube with the IRCAM DSP board under Nextstep 3.0.
hi all,
though im not informed about the status, i just wanted to inform you that there is an XonX available for mac os x that allows execution of x-windows programs under max-os, while the carbon-based gui is running. if interrested, i will search out the links. with this it should be possible to use a x-based application on max os x. and even more, if im right informed, tk is already ported to darwin ....
greets,
chris
Am Donnerstag, 26. Juli 2001 19:42 schrieb Miller Puckette:
There's a prosaic reason to want to port to Mac: sometimes you walk into a studio or concert hall and find only a Mac there. If you're a Pd user, you'd want to just run your music on the Mac...
I've already started on a port, using PortAudio; I don't know about CoreAudio/CoreMidi. But I think it's pointless until TK comes along for OSX, and we can't predict when that will become available, although I don't think more than a few months from now.
cheers Miller
On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 11:03:45AM -0400, John Lawter wrote:
Well, speaking only for myself: I am working on a port simply for my own amusement, and to learn CoreAudio. Pd also provides a neat framework to develop ideas of my own.
Irony would be back-porting it to run on a Cube with the IRCAM DSP board under Nextstep 3.0.
XonX is now part of the main XFree86 distribution (www.xfree86.org). What is there is full screen (i.e. it completely covers the native gui, but you can switch back and forth easily). The 'rootless' X server (that allows you to display X applications along side native ones) is alpha and doesn't really work reliably. It should happen soon though.
Karl
On Fri, 27 Jul 2001, Christian Klippel wrote:
hi all,
though im not informed about the status, i just wanted to inform you that there is an XonX available for mac os x that allows execution of x-windows programs under max-os, while the carbon-based gui is running. if interrested, i will search out the links. with this it should be possible to use a x-based application on max os x. and even more, if im right informed, tk is already ported to darwin ....
greets,
chris
Am Donnerstag, 26. Juli 2001 19:42 schrieb Miller Puckette:
There's a prosaic reason to want to port to Mac: sometimes you walk into a studio or concert hall and find only a Mac there. If you're a Pd user, you'd want to just run your music on the Mac...
I've already started on a port, using PortAudio; I don't know about CoreAudio/CoreMidi. But I think it's pointless until TK comes along for OSX, and we can't predict when that will become available, although I don't think more than a few months from now.
cheers Miller
On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 11:03:45AM -0400, John Lawter wrote:
Well, speaking only for myself: I am working on a port simply for my own amusement, and to learn CoreAudio. Pd also provides a neat framework to develop ideas of my own.
Irony would be back-porting it to run on a Cube with the IRCAM DSP board under Nextstep 3.0.
-- visit me at http://mamalala.de
Karl W. MacMillan Computer Music Department Peabody Institute of the Johns Hopkins University karlmac@peabody.jhu.edu mambo.peabody.jhu.edu/~karlmac
I think, however, that requiring Pd users to install XonX and then TK on top of it is a bit too much, which is why I've been holding out for a native osX version of TK to use instead.
cheers Miller
On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 11:46:39PM -0400, Karl MacMillan wrote:
XonX is now part of the main XFree86 distribution (www.xfree86.org). What is there is full screen (i.e. it completely covers the native gui, but you can switch back and forth easily). The 'rootless' X server (that allows you to display X applications along side native ones) is alpha and doesn't really work reliably. It should happen soon though.
Karl
On Fri, 27 Jul 2001, Christian Klippel wrote:
hi all,
though im not informed about the status, i just wanted to inform you that there is an XonX available for mac os x that allows execution of x-windows programs under max-os, while the carbon-based gui is running. if interrested, i will search out the links. with this it should be possible to use a x-based application on max os x. and even more, if im right informed, tk is already ported to darwin ....
greets,
chris
pd-new connect 7 0 0 0; // turn on audio; pd dsp 1; // and ... control it the first word is the name of the receive above; freq 500 4000; // that's it, there will be several things to figure out, but by writing; // this patch down in ascii I get the feeling that coding pd in lisp; // will be a killer ... defininitely.; // we will be able to automate lots of things I had to do by hand here;
I canŽt remember who wrote this quote as part of the documentation to write PD patches without the GUI. What do you mean with 'coding pd in clisp will be a killer'? Could you provide an clisp example to write pd-nogui files?
best wishes Ricardo Climent
Le Jeudi 26 Juillet 2001 14:51, Ricardo Climent a écrit :
pd-new connect 7 0 0 0; // turn on audio; pd dsp 1; // and ... control it the first word is the name of the receive above; freq 500 4000; // that's it, there will be several things to figure out, but by writing; // this patch down in ascii I get the feeling that coding pd in lisp; // will be a killer ... defininitely.; // we will be able to automate lots of things I had to do by hand here;
I can´t remember who wrote this quote as part of the documentation to write PD patches without the GUI. What do you mean with 'coding pd in clisp will be a killer'? Could you provide an clisp example to write pd-nogui files?
This "> >//" was write by Guenter Geiger. You can find all his work (no, only pdscript !) in the documentation I have post on the list jul 23.
You'll find too a script in TCL that show how to send message to pd (both in guy or no-gui mode) using socket.
I don't know clisp, but if it allow to use socket, then it will be very easy to drive or construct some pd patch with the no-gui option...
I guess that pdscript from guenter can work both in gui and no-gui mode (you just have to specify -nogui -open /rigth_path/lisp.pd)
I hope this help.
Damien HENRY
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Ricardo Climent wrote:
pd-new connect 7 0 0 0; // turn on audio; pd dsp 1; // and ... control it the first word is the name of the receive above; freq 500 4000; // that's it, there will be several things to figure out, but by writing; // this patch down in ascii I get the feeling that coding pd in lisp; // will be a killer ... defininitely.; // we will be able to automate lots of things I had to do by hand here;
I can�t remember who wrote this quote as part of the documentation to write PD patches without the GUI. What do you mean with 'coding pd in clisp will be a killer'? Could you provide an clisp example to write pd-nogui files?
The pdscript file was actually intended for someone who asked how to use the pd audio engine from within a scripting language. As Damien (is it Damien or Henry ?) pointed out it is not lisp specific, any language could be used to setup a patch and control it from the language afterwards. Instead of using sockets you can use stdout and pipe it to pdsend.
Guenter
i don't mean to be a snag here - but could someone explain the quest to port PD to the MacOS? especially with such an established community of MaxMSP users - is it the evil twin syndrome or...
i'm someone who has a few Macs lying about and wants to use pd. i'm already using jmax on OSX and pd would be great to have as well. esp. the networking goodies.
Is it that you have an unnegotiably strong affinity with both MacOS and PD, in that you would like to see them conjoined?
um. yes. similar to some who love linux and pd. that's the reason that particular port came about. what's the difference?
eg: what are the advantages other than the noble cause of the open software movement - i mean, considering the history of MaxMSP and PD, a port is a pretty ironic don't you think?
think of it as 'FTS Comes Home' then. the advantage is this: you will be gaining group of experienced Max users who will have lots of new tools to offer pd users.
oh and the port will happen regardless...
best cgc
-
chris clepper -
Christian Klippel -
delire -
florian -
guenter geiger -
HENRY Damien -
John Lawter -
Karl MacMillan -
Miller Puckette -
Ricardo Climent