hi,
just because it comes into my mind that moment: i recently had a path problem with pd.
is there a general agreement over where pd is installed under linux.
my installation resides in /usr/local yet /usr might be logical too. i remember that i had to move some libraries once. does it only work since there happens to be only one makefile template?
martin
martin pi
http://attacksyour.net/pi
www.machfeld.net
Hi Martin, martin pi hat gesagt: // martin pi wrote:
just because it comes into my mind that moment: i recently had a path problem with pd.
is there a general agreement over where pd is installed under linux.
my installation resides in /usr/local yet /usr might be logical too.
/usr/local normally is the place, where packages get installed, that don't belong to your distribution. Debian for example never installs packages to /usr/local, so you can install your personal stuff there without files getting overwritten by Debian packages. OTOH if you install a Debian package, it should live in /usr/
Personally I tend to build most software as packages for my distribution (Debian) so I can use the dist's tool to upgrade/remove packages. And then they are in /usr
You can have externals installed in /usr/local, even when you have pd in /usr, just add /usr/local/pd/EXTERNALNAME to your path. This doesn't work for the doc/5.reference patches, though.
The correct way would be to use autoconf and let the user decide, which prefix to use with "./configure --prefix=/usr[/local] but I'm not good in autoconf, so...
ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002 15:30:21 +0200 Frank Barknecht barknech@ph-cip.uni-koeln.de wrote:
Hi Martin, martin pi hat gesagt: // martin pi wrote:
The correct way would be to use autoconf and let the user decide, which prefix to use with "./configure --prefix=/usr[/local] but I'm not good in autoconf, so...
While we're on the topic, check out the program checkinstall - looks very cool for people (like me) who compile everything from scratch. builds packages automatically for a variety of different distributions to assist with easy uninstalling/tracking.
Chris. _________________________________ chris@mccormick.cx http://www.mccormick.cx http://www.sciencegirlrecords.com
To add to the confusion, the RPMs I make put Pd in /usr/bin (the standard RPM place) but the tarball's configure script puts everything in /usr/local (the standard, I think, for tarballs.) You can indeed do a ./configure --prefix=/usr to get Pd to land in /usr/bin.
cheers Miller
On Thu, Sep 12, 2002 at 03:30:21PM +0200, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hi Martin, martin pi hat gesagt: // martin pi wrote:
just because it comes into my mind that moment: i recently had a path problem with pd.
is there a general agreement over where pd is installed under linux.
my installation resides in /usr/local yet /usr might be logical too.
/usr/local normally is the place, where packages get installed, that don't belong to your distribution. Debian for example never installs packages to /usr/local, so you can install your personal stuff there without files getting overwritten by Debian packages. OTOH if you install a Debian package, it should live in /usr/
Personally I tend to build most software as packages for my distribution (Debian) so I can use the dist's tool to upgrade/remove packages. And then they are in /usr
You can have externals installed in /usr/local, even when you have pd in /usr, just add /usr/local/pd/EXTERNALNAME to your path. This doesn't work for the doc/5.reference patches, though.
The correct way would be to use autoconf and let the user decide, which prefix to use with "./configure --prefix=/usr[/local] but I'm not good in autoconf, so...
ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
PD-list mailing list PD-list@iem.kug.ac.at http://iem.kug.ac.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
after all. this is in fact exactly the answer i feared. but my confusion arose of the fact that i once tried the debian pd release and never removed it - so i had two pds installed.
thanks for clearing this martin
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hi, Miller Puckette hat gesagt: // Miller Puckette wrote:
To add to the confusion, the RPMs I make put Pd in /usr/bin (the standard RPM place)
Which I find OK. Your RPM's are as official as could be ;)
ciao,
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
PD-list mailing list PD-list@iem.kug.ac.at http://iem.kug.ac.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
martin pi
http://attacksyour.net/pi
www.machfeld.net
hi, martin pi hat gesagt: // martin pi wrote:
after all. this is in fact exactly the answer i feared. but my confusion arose of the fact that i once tried the debian pd release and never removed it - so i had two pds installed.
Yep, but double installed libraries are worse, IMO. I just yesterday tried to compile "sweep", which needs libsndlib1 and thus I installed the debs. But sweep's ./configure always found the old libsndlib0 in /usr/local and compilation failed, until I found my error and removed the /usr/local-library.
This is why I try to build even my local packages as Debian packages. This way, newer debian packages override my old packages and deinstall them automatically. A bit of reading in the dpkg-dev packages makes building debian packages rather easy, although they are not policy clean, but nobody cares here :)
ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, martin pi wrote:
hi, just because it comes into my mind that moment: i recently had a path problem with pd. is there a general agreement over where pd is installed under linux. my installation resides in /usr/local yet /usr might be logical too.
my installation resides in /home/matju and so your best bet is to figure out where m_pd.h is taken from and go up one level. I haven't written the code for that yet so my external still doesn't install in pd's paths.
matju
-
Chris McCormick -
Frank Barknecht -
martin pi -
Mathieu Bouchard -
Miller Puckette