I read:
But, when I open a patch that I created with version 0.36, it complains that 'receive' does not have an 'inlet' anymore.
receive never had an inlet (at least not recently) maybe you are using a patched x_connective.c or the cvs version ?
regards,
x
Adam,
I have been using your version. Has there ever been an inlet to a receive object on your system? This is pretty odd, as I have always seen an inlet on receive objects. I did think it was odd as the send objects only had inlets, and no outlets.
Anyway, this is probably just a fluke on my machine, althought I can't figure out why???
I looked at the source code for both the version I have been using (Adam's release), and the new 37 version, but there doesn't seem to be any change.
Everything seems to work, so I guess I will just go along "fat, dumb, and happy".
Thanks
Mike
CK wrote:
I read:
But, when I open a patch that I created with version 0.36, it complains that 'receive' does not have an 'inlet' anymore.
receive never had an inlet (at least not recently) maybe you are using a patched x_connective.c or the cvs version ?
regards,
x
Hello, Michael,
If you've been using "my" version, you've been using the CVS version. Not only did the extended version use the miscellaneous usability improvements, but it picked up other nifty changes that landed in CVS.
Now that the majority of the usability enhancements have gone "mainstream," (yay! thanks, Miller!) I see little reason to make Mac users use a forked version. I'll do what I can to help make sure installation is easier, but I don't see a pressing need for a full distro for the CVS version. Thoughts?
adam
Michael McGonagle said this at Sat, 3 May 2003 21:58:47 -0500:
Adam,
I have been using your version. Has there ever been an inlet to a receive object on your system? This is pretty odd, as I have always seen an inlet on receive objects. I did think it was odd as the send objects only had inlets, and no outlets.
Anyway, this is probably just a fluke on my machine, althought I can't figure out why???
I looked at the source code for both the version I have been using (Adam's release), and the new 37 version, but there doesn't seem to be any change.
Everything seems to work, so I guess I will just go along "fat, dumb, and happy".
Thanks
Mike
CK wrote:
I read:
But, when I open a patch that I created with version 0.36, it complains that 'receive' does not have an 'inlet' anymore.
receive never had an inlet (at least not recently) maybe you are using a patched x_connective.c or the cvs version ?
regards,
x
PD-list mailing list PD-list@iem.kug.ac.at http://iem.kug.ac.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
On Sun, 4 May 2003, Adam Lindsay wrote:
Hello, Michael,
If you've been using "my" version, you've been using the CVS version. Not only did the extended version use the miscellaneous usability improvements, but it picked up other nifty changes that landed in CVS.
Now that the majority of the usability enhancements have gone "mainstream," (yay! thanks, Miller!) I see little reason to make Mac users use a forked version. I'll do what I can to help make sure installation is easier, but I don't see a pressing need for a full distro for the CVS version. Thoughts?
Right, releases from the CVS version should actually be avoided if possible. I see the CVS rather as a repository for suggested additions and not as a "split" of pd. Thats why the CVS version is experimental.
Guenter
guenter geiger said this at Mon, 5 May 2003 10:59:25 +0200:
Right, releases from the CVS version should actually be avoided if possible. I see the CVS rather as a repository for suggested additions and not as a "split" of pd. Thats why the CVS version is experimental.
That suits my thinking just fine. Mac OS X "extended" as we know it is going away. Perhaps it's time for other experiments in the MacOSX space...
Cheers, adam
On Monday, May 5, 2003, at 04:59 America/New_York, guenter geiger wrote:
On Sun, 4 May 2003, Adam Lindsay wrote:
installation is easier, but I don't see a pressing need for a full distro for the CVS version. Thoughts?
Right, releases from the CVS version should actually be avoided if possible. I see the CVS rather as a repository for suggested additions and not as a "split" of pd. Thats why the CVS version is experimental.
We may not need a separate distro now, but once more stuff is added to the CVS, then people are going to want a CVS distro again. Plus if we are adding to the CVS, then people should test it. More people will test it if its easy to install. I personally like packages (OS X, debs, whatever) because they make it much easier to keep track of what's installed. I have 13 Macs which I use for sound installations, two linux boxes, and a Windows machine that I use Pd on, so anything that makes managing installs easier I like.
So I think we should have most people using the main distro, and then those with specific interest can use the CVS packages.
.hc
Hans-Christoph Steiner said this at Wed, 7 May 2003 16:33:42 -0400:
On Monday, May 5, 2003, at 04:59 America/New_York, guenter geiger wrote:
On Sun, 4 May 2003, Adam Lindsay wrote:
installation is easier, but I don't see a pressing need for a full distro for the CVS version. Thoughts?
Right, releases from the CVS version should actually be avoided if possible. I see the CVS rather as a repository for suggested additions and not as a "split" of pd. Thats why the CVS version is experimental.
I would agree with this.
We may not need a separate distro now, but once more stuff is added to the CVS, then people are going to want a CVS distro again. Plus if we are adding to the CVS, then people should test it. More people will test it if its easy to install. I personally like packages (OS X, debs, whatever) because they make it much easier to keep track of what's installed.
Packages are different. One way or another, there will be a nice Pd installer for MacOSX.
So I think we should have most people using the main distro, and then those with specific interest can use the CVS packages.
I can see practical reasons for this, if there's a compelling feature (that affects many people) to come from CVS. But since all the "must have" features that distinguished MacOSX/Extended have made it into the mainstream, I don't see it happening soon.
-
Adam Lindsay -
CK -
guenter geiger -
Hans-Christoph Steiner -
Michael McGonagle