Quantcast

Tarballs

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
59 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Tarballs

Stevethefiddle
Here's a minsrc tarball for consideration:
http://easyspacepro.com/audacity/audacity-minsrc-2.0.3.tar.xz

I'm not sure if it should be named as 2.0.3 (release) or 2.0.3-RC1 or
something else, so I just set it as a release build.

I'm having some problems with the full-source tarball because:
1) I can't test on Windows
2) A couple of the libraries in SVN do not build correctly on my
machine, so they error in the full source tarball.

Do we really need the full source tarball? As I understand it, it is
better for Linux users to use system libraries when possible. For
Windows developers I'd have thought they world be better to use SVN
than a tarball.

Steve

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master Java SE, Java EE, Eclipse, Spring, Hibernate, JavaScript, jQuery
and much more. Keep your Java skills current with LearnJavaNow -
200+ hours of step-by-step video tutorials by Java experts.
SALE $49.99 this month only -- learn more at:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122612 
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Tarballs

Gale
Administrator

| From Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]>
| Wed, 16 Jan 2013 18:09:18 +0000
| Subject: [Audacity-devel] Tarballs

> Here's a minsrc tarball for consideration:
> http://easyspacepro.com/audacity/audacity-minsrc-2.0.3.tar.xz
>
> I'm not sure if it should be named as 2.0.3 (release) or 2.0.3-RC1 or
> something else, so I just set it as a release build.
>
> I'm having some problems with the full-source tarball because:
> 1) I can't test on Windows
> 2) A couple of the libraries in SVN do not build correctly on my
> machine, so they error in the full source tarball.
>
> Do we really need the full source tarball? As I understand it, it is
> better for Linux users to use system libraries when possible. For
> Windows developers I'd have thought they world be better to use SVN
> than a tarball.
>
> Steve

Thanks, Steve!

I confirm on Ubuntu 12.04 32-bit that I did ./configure on that with
correct-looking output, then built it OK.

"About Audacity" looks correct ("Audacity 2.0.3") and only libsoxr
is enabled. Did some recordings and playbacks, including time track
with track and project rate different. Seems fine.    

I believe the filename itself should be :

   audacity-minsrc-2.0.3rc1.tar.xz

Full source tarball only has one-fifth of the downloads of the min-src.



Gale


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master Java SE, Java EE, Eclipse, Spring, Hibernate, JavaScript, jQuery
and much more. Keep your Java skills current with LearnJavaNow -
200+ hours of step-by-step video tutorials by Java experts.
SALE $49.99 this month only -- learn more at:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122612 
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Tarballs

Stevethefiddle
On 16 January 2013 19:50, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> | From Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]>
> | Wed, 16 Jan 2013 18:09:18 +0000
> | Subject: [Audacity-devel] Tarballs
>> Here's a minsrc tarball for consideration:
>> http://easyspacepro.com/audacity/audacity-minsrc-2.0.3.tar.xz
>>
>> I'm not sure if it should be named as 2.0.3 (release) or 2.0.3-RC1 or
>> something else, so I just set it as a release build.
>>
>> I'm having some problems with the full-source tarball because:
>> 1) I can't test on Windows
>> 2) A couple of the libraries in SVN do not build correctly on my
>> machine, so they error in the full source tarball.
>>
>> Do we really need the full source tarball? As I understand it, it is
>> better for Linux users to use system libraries when possible. For
>> Windows developers I'd have thought they world be better to use SVN
>> than a tarball.
>>
>> Steve
>
> Thanks, Steve!
>
> I confirm on Ubuntu 12.04 32-bit that I did ./configure on that with
> correct-looking output, then built it OK.
>
> "About Audacity" looks correct ("Audacity 2.0.3") and only libsoxr
> is enabled. Did some recordings and playbacks, including time track
> with track and project rate different. Seems fine.
>
> I believe the filename itself should be :
>
>    audacity-minsrc-2.0.3rc1.tar.xz
>
> Full source tarball only has one-fifth of the downloads of the min-src.

I suspect that a lot of those are people on Linux that don't actually
need the full source, but download it "just in case" they need some of
the extra bits.

Steve

>
>
>
> Gale
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Master Java SE, Java EE, Eclipse, Spring, Hibernate, JavaScript, jQuery
> and much more. Keep your Java skills current with LearnJavaNow -
> 200+ hours of step-by-step video tutorials by Java experts.
> SALE $49.99 this month only -- learn more at:
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122612
> _______________________________________________
> audacity-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master Java SE, Java EE, Eclipse, Spring, Hibernate, JavaScript, jQuery
and much more. Keep your Java skills current with LearnJavaNow -
200+ hours of step-by-step video tutorials by Java experts.
SALE $49.99 this month only -- learn more at:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122612 
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Tarballs

MartynShaw
Hi Steve

I got a Linux thingy here
http://sourceforge.net/projects/portableubuntu/
and ran it, un-xz-ed you file (after a  followed a bit of
http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Developing_On_Linux_Under_Windows,
wot I wrote)
but had to
sudo apt-get install xz-utils
and then
sudo apt-get build-dep audacity
and
sudo apt-get install cmake
to get libsoxr going, since it appeared to be missing.  (Shouldn't
that be picked up by 'apt-get build-dep audacity'?)
But anyway, the basic instructions worked and I have a running
Audacity here.  No actual audio, but that could be for a multitude of
reasons!

So it looks like we have a builder for the
audacity-minsrc-2.0.3rc1.tar.xz !

Thanks!
Martyn

On 16/01/2013 20:42, Steve the Fiddle wrote:

> On 16 January 2013 19:50, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> | From Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]>
>> | Wed, 16 Jan 2013 18:09:18 +0000
>> | Subject: [Audacity-devel] Tarballs
>>> Here's a minsrc tarball for consideration:
>>> http://easyspacepro.com/audacity/audacity-minsrc-2.0.3.tar.xz
>>>
>>> I'm not sure if it should be named as 2.0.3 (release) or 2.0.3-RC1 or
>>> something else, so I just set it as a release build.
>>>
>>> I'm having some problems with the full-source tarball because:
>>> 1) I can't test on Windows
>>> 2) A couple of the libraries in SVN do not build correctly on my
>>> machine, so they error in the full source tarball.
>>>
>>> Do we really need the full source tarball? As I understand it, it is
>>> better for Linux users to use system libraries when possible. For
>>> Windows developers I'd have thought they world be better to use SVN
>>> than a tarball.
>>>
>>> Steve
>>
>> Thanks, Steve!
>>
>> I confirm on Ubuntu 12.04 32-bit that I did ./configure on that with
>> correct-looking output, then built it OK.
>>
>> "About Audacity" looks correct ("Audacity 2.0.3") and only libsoxr
>> is enabled. Did some recordings and playbacks, including time track
>> with track and project rate different. Seems fine.
>>
>> I believe the filename itself should be :
>>
>>     audacity-minsrc-2.0.3rc1.tar.xz
>>
>> Full source tarball only has one-fifth of the downloads of the min-src.
>
> I suspect that a lot of those are people on Linux that don't actually
> need the full source, but download it "just in case" they need some of
> the extra bits.
>
> Steve
>
>>
>>
>>
>> Gale
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Master Java SE, Java EE, Eclipse, Spring, Hibernate, JavaScript, jQuery
>> and much more. Keep your Java skills current with LearnJavaNow -
>> 200+ hours of step-by-step video tutorials by Java experts.
>> SALE $49.99 this month only -- learn more at:
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122612
>> _______________________________________________
>> audacity-devel mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Master Java SE, Java EE, Eclipse, Spring, Hibernate, JavaScript, jQuery
> and much more. Keep your Java skills current with LearnJavaNow -
> 200+ hours of step-by-step video tutorials by Java experts.
> SALE $49.99 this month only -- learn more at:
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122612
> _______________________________________________
> audacity-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS,
MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current
with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft
MVPs and experts. ON SALE this month only -- learn more at:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122712
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Tarballs

Vaughan Johnson
Administrator
In reply to this post by Stevethefiddle
On 1/16/2013 12:42 PM, Steve the Fiddle wrote:
> On 16 January 2013 19:50, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> | From Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]>
>> | Wed, 16 Jan 2013 18:09:18 +0000
>> | Subject: [Audacity-devel] Tarballs
>>> Here's a minsrc tarball for consideration:
>>> http://easyspacepro.com/audacity/audacity-minsrc-2.0.3.tar.xz

Fantastic, Steve.


>>>
>>> I'm not sure if it should be named as 2.0.3 (release) or 2.0.3-RC1 or
>>> something else, so I just set it as a release build.

Well, I think it's still "alpha" in the About dialog, so neither of
those, really, not ready to post as rc1.

But excellent proof of new capability. Thanks for your help.


>>>
>>> I'm having some problems with the full-source tarball because:
>>> 1) I can't test on Windows
>>> 2) A couple of the libraries in SVN do not build correctly on my
>>> machine, so they error in the full source tarball.
>>>
>>> Do we really need the full source tarball? As I understand it, it is
>>> better for Linux users to use system libraries when possible. For
>>> Windows developers I'd have thought they world be better to use SVN
>>> than a tarball.

I defer to Linux experts.


>>>[...]
>> I believe the filename itself should be :
>>
>>    audacity-minsrc-2.0.3rc1.tar.xz

Yes, when About dialog shows it's not "alpha".


>>
>> Full source tarball only has one-fifth of the downloads of the min-src.
>
> I suspect that a lot of those are people on Linux that don't actually
> need the full source, but download it "just in case" they need some of
> the extra bits.

Simplification is better. Sounds good to me to ditch full if min will be
sufficient.

Thanks!

- V



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS,
MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current
with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft
MVPs and experts. ON SALE this month only -- learn more at:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122712
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Tarballs

Vaughan Johnson
Administrator
In reply to this post by MartynShaw
On 1/16/2013 5:06 PM, Martyn Shaw wrote:
> [...]
>
> So it looks like we have a builder for the
> audacity-minsrc-2.0.3rc1.tar.xz !

Hooray! Some kinks are bound to happen in learning how to do it.


>
> Thanks!

Yes!

- V



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS,
MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current
with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft
MVPs and experts. ON SALE this month only -- learn more at:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122712
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Tarballs

Gale
Administrator
In reply to this post by MartynShaw

| From Martyn Shaw <[hidden email]>
| Thu, 17 Jan 2013 01:06:54 +0000

> I got a Linux thingy here
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/portableubuntu/
> and ran it, un-xz-ed you file (after a  followed a bit of
> http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Developing_On_Linux_Under_Windows,
> wot I wrote)
> but had to
> sudo apt-get install xz-utils
> and then
> sudo apt-get build-dep audacity
> and
> sudo apt-get install cmake
> to get libsoxr going, since it appeared to be missing.  (Shouldn't
> that be picked up by 'apt-get build-dep audacity'?)

As I understand it, it will be up to distro managers to update
so that they include cmake as a build dependency for Audacity.

This then means that the distro's package management system
will obtain and install cmake when you run its command to install
build dependencies.  

I also understand that as cmake is now a dependency for Audacity,
I will have to add it as such here:
http://audacity.sourceforge.net/download/source 

for 2.0.3 release.



Gale


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS,
MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current
with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft
MVPs and experts. ON SALE this month only -- learn more at:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122712
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

apt-get build-dep audacity (was: Tarballs)

Benjamin Drung-3
In reply to this post by MartynShaw
Am Donnerstag, den 17.01.2013, 01:06 +0000 schrieb Martyn Shaw:
> sudo apt-get build-dep audacity
> and
> sudo apt-get install cmake
> to get libsoxr going, since it appeared to be missing.  (Shouldn't
> that be picked up by 'apt-get build-dep audacity'?)

"apt-get build-dep audacity" installs the build dependencies from the
source package of your Ubuntu system. audacity 2.0.2 (or earlier) from
the archive does build depend on cmake, because cmake will be a new
dependency for version 2.0.3. A future Ubuntu release will have an
audacity package that build depends on libsoxr-dev (which will probably
remove the need for having cmake installed).

--
Benjamin Drung
Debian & Ubuntu Developer


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master HTML5, CSS3, ASP.NET, MVC, AJAX, Knockout.js, Web API and
much more. Get web development skills now with LearnDevNow -
350+ hours of step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft MVPs and experts.
SALE $99.99 this month only -- learn more at:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122812
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Tarballs

Benjamin Drung-3
In reply to this post by Vaughan Johnson
Am Mittwoch, den 16.01.2013, 20:21 -0800 schrieb Vaughan Johnson:

> On 1/16/2013 12:42 PM, Steve the Fiddle wrote:
> > On 16 January 2013 19:50, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> | From Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]>
> >>> I'm having some problems with the full-source tarball because:
> >>> 1) I can't test on Windows
> >>> 2) A couple of the libraries in SVN do not build correctly on my
> >>> machine, so they error in the full source tarball.
> >>>
> >>> Do we really need the full source tarball? As I understand it, it is
> >>> better for Linux users to use system libraries when possible. For
> >>> Windows developers I'd have thought they world be better to use SVN
> >>> than a tarball.
>
> I defer to Linux experts.

I guess that the minsrc tarball is sufficient for most Linux users. We
always use the minsrc tarball in Debian/Ubuntu and nyquist is the only
library that we need from the lib-src directory. From a Linux user
perspective, the full source tarball could go away.

I think it makes sense to keep the full source tarball and use it for
the Windows (and Mac?) builds. Then you can point user of your built
binaries to the corresponding source tarballs. This is in my opinion
easier than to point to a specific revision of an svn checkout.

--
Benjamin Drung
Debian & Ubuntu Developer


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master HTML5, CSS3, ASP.NET, MVC, AJAX, Knockout.js, Web API and
much more. Get web development skills now with LearnDevNow -
350+ hours of step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft MVPs and experts.
SALE $99.99 this month only -- learn more at:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122812
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Tarballs

Vaughan Johnson
Administrator
On 1/18/2013 3:57 PM, Benjamin Drung wrote:

> Am Mittwoch, den 16.01.2013, 20:21 -0800 schrieb Vaughan Johnson:
>> On 1/16/2013 12:42 PM, Steve the Fiddle wrote:
>>> On 16 January 2013 19:50, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> | From Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]>
>>>>> I'm having some problems with the full-source tarball because:
>>>>> 1) I can't test on Windows
>>>>> 2) A couple of the libraries in SVN do not build correctly on my
>>>>> machine, so they error in the full source tarball.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do we really need the full source tarball? As I understand it, it is
>>>>> better for Linux users to use system libraries when possible. For
>>>>> Windows developers I'd have thought they world be better to use SVN
>>>>> than a tarball.
>>
>> I defer to Linux experts.
>
> I guess that the minsrc tarball is sufficient for most Linux users. We
> always use the minsrc tarball in Debian/Ubuntu and nyquist is the only
> library that we need from the lib-src directory. From a Linux user
> perspective, the full source tarball could go away.
>
> I think it makes sense to keep the full source tarball and use it for
> the Windows (and Mac?) builds. Then you can point user of your built
> binaries to the corresponding source tarballs. This is in my opinion
> easier than to point to a specific revision of an svn checkout.
>

Okay, thanks, but I don't think we have resources to do full tarball
this release, as was pretty extensively discussed.

If I'm incorrect about that, sure, let's do it. We're certainly
resource-limited, so I think we should not spend a lot of effort on
icing the cake.

- V


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS,
MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current
with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft
MVPs and experts. SALE $99.99 this month only -- learn more at:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122912
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: apt-get build-dep audacity

Vaughan Johnson
Administrator
In reply to this post by Benjamin Drung-3
On 1/18/2013 3:50 PM, Benjamin Drung wrote:

> Am Donnerstag, den 17.01.2013, 01:06 +0000 schrieb Martyn Shaw:
>> sudo apt-get build-dep audacity
>> and
>> sudo apt-get install cmake
>> to get libsoxr going, since it appeared to be missing.  (Shouldn't
>> that be picked up by 'apt-get build-dep audacity'?)
>
> "apt-get build-dep audacity" installs the build dependencies from the
> source package of your Ubuntu system. audacity 2.0.2 (or earlier) from
> the archive does build depend on cmake, because cmake will be a new
> dependency for version 2.0.3. A future Ubuntu release will have an
> audacity package that build depends on libsoxr-dev (which will probably
> remove the need for having cmake installed).

Thanks for the explanation. Removing a dependency and a distinction by
using libsoxr-dev seems like a good thing to me. :-)

- V


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS,
MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current
with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft
MVPs and experts. SALE $99.99 this month only -- learn more at:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122912
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Tarballs

Gale
Administrator
In reply to this post by Vaughan Johnson

| From Vaughan Johnson <[hidden email]>
| Fri, 18 Jan 2013 19:07:05 -0800
| Subject: [Audacity-devel] Tarballs

> On 1/18/2013 3:57 PM, Benjamin Drung wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, den 16.01.2013, 20:21 -0800 schrieb Vaughan Johnson:
> >> On 1/16/2013 12:42 PM, Steve the Fiddle wrote:
> >>> On 16 January 2013 19:50, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>> | From Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]>
> >>>>> I'm having some problems with the full-source tarball because:
> >>>>> 1) I can't test on Windows
> >>>>> 2) A couple of the libraries in SVN do not build correctly on my
> >>>>> machine, so they error in the full source tarball.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Do we really need the full source tarball? As I understand it, it is
> >>>>> better for Linux users to use system libraries when possible. For
> >>>>> Windows developers I'd have thought they world be better to use SVN
> >>>>> than a tarball.
> >>
> >> I defer to Linux experts.
> >
> > I guess that the minsrc tarball is sufficient for most Linux users. We
> > always use the minsrc tarball in Debian/Ubuntu and nyquist is the only
> > library that we need from the lib-src directory. From a Linux user
> > perspective, the full source tarball could go away.
> >
> > I think it makes sense to keep the full source tarball and use it for
> > the Windows (and Mac?) builds. Then you can point user of your built
> > binaries to the corresponding source tarballs. This is in my opinion
> > easier than to point to a specific revision of an svn checkout.
> >
>
> Okay, thanks, but I don't think we have resources to do full tarball
> this release, as was pretty extensively discussed.
>
> If I'm incorrect about that, sure, let's do it. We're certainly
> resource-limited, so I think we should not spend a lot of effort on
> icing the cake.

The maketarball.sh script uses:

./configure --enable-maintainer-mode --with-libsndfile=local --with-lib-preference=\"local system\"

As I understand it, if you try to build all the libs needed for the
fullsrc using that ./configure, you end up with a failed configure
"fails with unexpected EOF's at line 8525 and 8526" or similar
(I can confirm that).



Gale


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS,
MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current
with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft
MVPs and experts. SALE $99.99 this month only -- learn more at:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122912
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Tarballs

Vaughan Johnson
Administrator
On 1/19/2013 4:19 AM, Gale Andrews wrote:

>
> | From Vaughan Johnson <[hidden email]>
> | Fri, 18 Jan 2013 19:07:05 -0800
>> On 1/18/2013 3:57 PM, Benjamin Drung wrote:
>>> Am Mittwoch, den 16.01.2013, 20:21 -0800 schrieb Vaughan Johnson:
>>>> On 1/16/2013 12:42 PM, Steve the Fiddle wrote:
>>>>> On 16 January 2013 19:50, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>> | From Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>> Do we really need the full source tarball? As I understand it, it is
>>>>>>> better for Linux users to use system libraries when possible. For
>>>>>>> Windows developers I'd have thought they world be better to use SVN
>>>>>>> than a tarball.
>>>>
>>>> I defer to Linux experts.
>>>
>>> I guess that the minsrc tarball is sufficient for most Linux users. We
>>> always use the minsrc tarball in Debian/Ubuntu and nyquist is the only
>>> library that we need from the lib-src directory. From a Linux user
>>> perspective, the full source tarball could go away.
>>>
>>> I think it makes sense to keep the full source tarball and use it for
>>> the Windows (and Mac?) builds. Then you can point user of your built
>>> binaries to the corresponding source tarballs. This is in my opinion
>>> easier than to point to a specific revision of an svn checkout.
>>>
>>
>> Okay, thanks, but I don't think we have resources to do full tarball
>> this release, as was pretty extensively discussed.
>>
>> If I'm incorrect about that, sure, let's do it. We're certainly
>> resource-limited, so I think we should not spend a lot of effort on
>> icing the cake.
>
> The maketarball.sh script uses:
>
> ./configure --enable-maintainer-mode --with-libsndfile=local --with-lib-preference=\"local system\"
>
> As I understand it, if you try to build all the libs needed for the
> fullsrc using that ./configure, you end up with a failed configure
> "fails with unexpected EOF's at line 8525 and 8526" or similar
> (I can confirm that).
>

Thanks.

So is that a -1 for full tarball for 2.0.3?

Or +1 that we need to fix this and include it in 2.0.3?

- V



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS,
MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current
with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft
MVPs and experts. ON SALE this month only -- learn more at:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_123012
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Tarballs

Gale
Administrator
>>> "Vaughan Johnson" wrote: >> On 1/19/2013 4:19 AM, Gale Andrews wrote: >>>> Benjamin wrote: >>>> I think it makes sense to keep the full source tarball and use it for >>>> the Windows (and Mac?) builds. Then you can point user of your built >>>> binaries to the corresponding source tarballs. This is in my opinion >>>> easier than to point to a specific revision of an svn checkout. >>>> >>> >>> Okay, thanks, but I don't think we have resources to do full tarball >>> this release, as was pretty extensively discussed. >>> >>> If I'm incorrect about that, sure, let's do it. We're certainly >>> resource-limited, so I think we should not spend a lot of effort on >>> icing the cake. >> >> The maketarball.sh script uses: >> >> ./configure --enable-maintainer-mode --with-libsndfile=local --with-lib-preference=\"local system\" >> >> As I understand it, if you try to build all the libs needed for the >> fullsrc using that ./configure, you end up with a failed configure >> "fails with unexpected EOF's at line 8525 and 8526" or similar >> (I can confirm that). > > > Thanks. > > So is that a -1 for full tarball for 2.0.3? > > Or +1 that we need to fix this and include it in 2.0.3? My 2p is that it would be "preferable" to have a full tarball for 2.0.3. Benjamin prefers it, and (IMO) it gives a *much* better impression vis-a-vis what we've always done in the recent past. I know Linux users are not the main user base, but in some ways we have a stronger connection with Linux than the other OS'es. If an expert was stepping up with a patch to enable a full tarball that meant we could have an rc2 at 22:00 GMT on 20 January I would be +1 on balance. In the absence of that happening I don't think we "need" to fix it at the cost of an indeterminate delay to the release. If we want the fullsrc tarball going forward and we don't fix it now, I think there should be a P2 bug to re-enable building it. Gale
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Tarballs

Gale
Administrator

Sorry about that unreadable mess, I sent it using Nabble but
something went wrong.

Readable version below.
 

>>> "Vaughan Johnson" wrote:
>> On 1/19/2013 4:19 AM, Gale Andrews wrote:
>>>> Benjamin wrote:
>>>> I think it makes sense to keep the full source tarball and use it for
>>>> the Windows (and Mac?) builds. Then you can point user of your built
>>>> binaries to the corresponding source tarballs. This is in my opinion
>>>> easier than to point to a specific revision of an svn checkout.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Okay, thanks, but I don't think we have resources to do full tarball
>>> this release, as was pretty extensively discussed.
>>>
>>> If I'm incorrect about that, sure, let's do it. We're certainly
>>> resource-limited, so I think we should not spend a lot of effort on
>>> icing the cake.
>>
>> The maketarball.sh script uses:
>>
>> ./configure --enable-maintainer-mode --with-libsndfile=local --with-lib-preference=\"local system\"
>>
>> As I understand it, if you try to build all the libs needed for the
>> fullsrc using that ./configure, you end up with a failed configure
>> "fails with unexpected EOF's at line 8525 and 8526" or similar
>> (I can confirm that).
>
>
> Thanks.
>
> So is that a -1 for full tarball for 2.0.3?
>
> Or +1 that we need to fix this and include it in 2.0.3?

My 2p is that it would be "preferable" to have a full tarball for 2.0.3.
Benjamin prefers it, and (IMO) it gives a *much* better impression
vis-a-vis what we've always done in the recent past. I know
Linux users are not the main user base, but in some ways we
have a stronger connection with Linux than the other OS'es.

If an expert was stepping up with a patch to enable a full tarball
that meant we could have an rc2 at 22:00 GMT on 20 January
I would be +1 on balance.  

In the absence of that happening I don't think we "need" to fix
it at the cost of an indeterminate delay to the release.

If we want the fullsrc tarball going forward and we don't fix it now,
I think there should be a P2 bug to re-enable building it.  

 


Gale





| From "Gale (Audacity Team)" <[hidden email]>
| Sat, 19 Jan 2013 23:18:48 -0800 (PST)
| Subject: [Audacity-devel] Tarballs

> >>> "Vaughan Johnson" wrote:>> On 1/19/2013 4:19 AM, Gale Andrews wrote:>>>>
> Benjamin wrote:>>>> I think it makes sense to keep the full source tarball
> and use it for>>>> the Windows (and Mac?) builds. Then you can point user of
> your built>>>> binaries to the corresponding source tarballs. This is in my
> opinion>>>> easier than to point to a specific revision of an svn
> checkout.>>>>>>>>>> Okay, thanks, but I don't think we have resources to do
> full tarball>>> this release, as was pretty extensively discussed.>>>>>> If
> I'm incorrect about that, sure, let's do it. We're certainly>>>
> resource-limited, so I think we should not spend a lot of effort on>>> icing
> the cake. >> >> The maketarball.sh script uses:>> >> ./configure
> --enable-maintainer-mode --with-libsndfile=local
> --with-lib-preference=\"local system\">> >> As I understand it, if you try
> to build all the libs needed for the>> fullsrc using that ./configure, you
> end up with a failed configure>> "fails with unexpected EOF's at line 8525
> and 8526" or similar >> (I can confirm that). > >> Thanks.>> So is that a -1
> for full tarball for 2.0.3?>> Or +1 that we need to fix this and include it
> in 2.0.3?My 2p is that it would be "preferable" to have a full tarball for
> 2.0.3.Benjamin prefers it, and (IMO) it gives a *much* better
> impressionvis-a-vis what we've always done in the recent past. I know Linux
> users are not the main user base, but in some ways we have a stronger
> connection with Linux than the other OS'es. If an expert was stepping up
> with a patch to enable a full tarball that meant we could have an rc2 at
> 22:00 GMT on 20 January I would be +1 on balance.  In the absence of that
> happening I don't think we "need" to fixit at the cost of an indeterminate
> delay to the release. If we want the fullsrc tarball going forward and we
> don't fix it now,I think there should be a P2 bug to re-enable building it.  
> Gale
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://audacity.238276.n2.nabble.com/Tarballs-tp7557311p7557423.html
> Sent from the audacity-devel mailing list archive at Nabble.com.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS,
MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current
with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft
MVPs and experts. ON SALE this month only -- learn more at:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_123012
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Tarballs

Vaughan Johnson
Administrator
In reply to this post by Gale
On 1/19/2013 11:18 PM, Gale (Audacity Team) wrote:

>>>> "Vaughan Johnson" wrote: >> On 1/19/2013 4:19 AM, Gale Andrews
> wrote: >>>> Benjamin wrote: >>>> I think it makes sense to keep the full
> source tarball and use it for >>>> the Windows (and Mac?) builds. Then
> you can point user of your built >>>> binaries to the corresponding
> source tarballs. This is in my opinion >>>> easier than to point to a
> specific revision of an svn checkout. >>>> >>> >>> Okay, thanks, but I
> don't think we have resources to do full tarball >>> this release, as
> was pretty extensively discussed. >>> >>> If I'm incorrect about that,
> sure, let's do it. We're certainly >>> resource-limited, so I think we
> should not spend a lot of effort on >>> icing the cake. >> >> The
> maketarball.sh script uses: >> >> ./configure --enable-maintainer-mode
> --with-libsndfile=local --with-lib-preference=\"local system\" >> >> As
> I understand it, if you try to build all the libs needed for the >>
> fullsrc using that ./configure, you end up with a failed configure >>
> "fails with unexpected EOF's at line 8525 and 8526" or similar >> (I can
> confirm that). > > > Thanks. > > So is that a -1 for full tarball for
> 2.0.3? > > Or +1 that we need to fix this and include it in 2.0.3?

I don't know why your formatting was so messed up when it arrived to me.
Anybody else have this problem?


>My 2p
> is that it would be "preferable" to have a full tarball for 2.0.3.
> Benjamin prefers it, and (IMO) it gives a *much* better impression
> vis-a-vis what we've always done in the recent past.

Yes, we've heard that already. But my understanding is that overall,
it's not *necessary* (even per Benjamin), so I don't see that precedent
as stopping us from simplifying the task, now and going forward.

And hey, Benjamin's wording was "makes sense to keep the full source
tarball and use it for the Windows (and Mac?) builds". I should have
read that more carefully the first time -- totally unnecessary imo.
People who want to build on Win or Mac have access to SVN and/or
min-tarball, and complete instructions on what else they need.


Your saying "preferable" implies it's not necessary, and that's what we
need to decide. We don't have resources to use on tasks that are not
necessary.

I asked you for +1 or -1 -- meaning is it necessary to change the
decision already made? You didn't give +1 or -1.

Looks like no to me. And especially, why are we discussing this again
when we decided on it a few days ago? Just because it came up again,
with no new info, in fact about narrower set of people (those who build
on Win/Mac, excluding Linux)?

Let's get the release completed. My RM final decision is to stick with
what we decided a few days ago, no full-src tarball.



>I know Linux users
> are not the main user base, but in some ways we have a stronger
> connection with Linux than the other OS'es. If an expert was stepping up
> with a patch to enable a full tarball

If an expert "were". It's subjunctive mood, because it's speculative --
not past tense "was".

Past tense it was true, we had somebody who could/would do it. But now
that speculation has been proven wrong, we don't have an expert stepping
up to do it.

Let's stop re-discussing decisions already made, and stop speculating
what we would do with resources we do not have. Let's get this release out.


>that meant we could have an rc2 at
> 22:00 GMT on 20 January I would be +1 on balance.

No testing?! It's already half-way through the 48-hour testing cycle.

And who's going to do it? Nobody has volunteered. Too late.


>In the absence of that
> happening I don't think we "need" to fix it at the cost of an
> indeterminate delay to the release.

That's already been shown and determined.

Nixed by RM.


>If we want the fullsrc tarball going
> forward and we don't fix it now, I think there should be a P2 bug to
> re-enable building it. Gale

-1. As I understand it, the experts don't think it's necessary. We're
running on very limited resources, so we shouldn't resume full-src
tarballs until we have resources, and stronger reasons than Win/Mac
builders who have other ways to do it.

And when we have more resources, there are many, much more important
things to address.

- V



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS,
MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current
with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft
MVPs and experts. ON SALE this month only -- learn more at:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_123012
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Tarballs

Vaughan Johnson
Administrator
In reply to this post by Gale
On 1/19/2013 11:35 PM, Gale Andrews wrote:
>
> Sorry about that unreadable mess, I sent it using Nabble but
> something went wrong.
>
> Readable version below.

Oops, already replied to the prior one. Thanks for clarifying.

:-)

- V


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS,
MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current
with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft
MVPs and experts. ON SALE this month only -- learn more at:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_123012
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Tarballs

Gale
Administrator
In reply to this post by Vaughan Johnson

| From Vaughan Johnson <[hidden email]>
| Sun, 20 Jan 2013 00:11:41 -0800
| Subject: [Audacity-devel] Tarballs
[...]
> Your saying "preferable" implies it's not necessary, and that's what we
> need to decide. We don't have resources to use on tasks that are not
> necessary.
>
> I asked you for +1 or -1 -- meaning is it necessary to change the
> decision already made? You didn't give +1 or -1.  

Vaughan, I'm not arguing/contradicting here, just clarifying. :=)

We don't know the future. So I +1'ed if we have a patch in good
time today, -1'ed if we don't. Obviously, leaving that door open
might encourage a patch.  

What you're now saying (I think) is that if we had a patch to fix
fullsrc this lunchtime, you wouldn't accept it, because it would
delay the release (strictly) by two days.

That looks like a valid view to me, especially given my "preferable"
does indeed imply it's not really functionally "necessary". It's just
a decision about whether something most agree is "preferable" is
worth up to two days, should the opportunity arise.  
 
 
> >that meant we could have an rc2 at
> > 22:00 GMT on 20 January I would be +1 on balance.
>
> No testing?! It's already half-way through the 48-hour testing cycle.

Of course, testing. It would have to (strictly) delay the release by two
days.

Or RM could decide "nothing changed but the tarballs" so once tested
we could only wait one day.
     

> >If we want the fullsrc tarball going
> > forward and we don't fix it now, I think there should be a P2 bug to
> > re-enable building it. Gale
>
> -1. As I understand it, the experts don't think it's necessary. We're
> running on very limited resources, so we shouldn't resume full-src
> tarballs until we have resources, and stronger reasons than Win/Mac
> builders who have other ways to do it.
>
> And when we have more resources, there are many, much more important
> things to address.

As I said, "if" we want fullsrc tarballs.

IMO if we don't have a P2 for it, then we are making a policy decision
to stop supporting fullsrc tarballs. We can't have fullsrc coming and
going with releases according to if we have the resources.

So if no P2, I think we should announce that as from this release,
we only supply minsrc tarballs.

I think supplying minsrc should be a commitment, but you don't,
so I guess you would argue even supplying minsrc should be
stated as "subject to resources"?

At the very least, I think we've got to be clear here:
http://audacity.sourceforge.net/download/source  .

what our intentions are.

 

Gale



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS,
MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current
with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft
MVPs and experts. ON SALE this month only -- learn more at:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_123012
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Tarballs

Vaughan Johnson
Administrator
In reply to this post by Vaughan Johnson
This point is decided for 2.0.3 -- no full-src tarballs.

Taking rest of this discussion about interactions to team@, because I
consider it "family matters", not relevant to getting tarballs per se,
or testing this release in the 48-hour release candidate testing cycle
-- which *should* be our top priority currently, not digresssions about
decisions already made.


- V


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS,
MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current
with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft
MVPs and experts. ON SALE this month only -- learn more at:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_123012
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Tarballs

Benjamin Drung-3
In reply to this post by Gale
Am Samstag, den 19.01.2013, 12:19 +0000 schrieb Gale Andrews:

> | From Vaughan Johnson <[hidden email]>
> | Fri, 18 Jan 2013 19:07:05 -0800
> | Subject: [Audacity-devel] Tarballs
> > On 1/18/2013 3:57 PM, Benjamin Drung wrote:
> > > Am Mittwoch, den 16.01.2013, 20:21 -0800 schrieb Vaughan Johnson:
> > >> On 1/16/2013 12:42 PM, Steve the Fiddle wrote:
> > >>> On 16 January 2013 19:50, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >>>> | From Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]>
> > >>>>> I'm having some problems with the full-source tarball because:
> > >>>>> 1) I can't test on Windows
> > >>>>> 2) A couple of the libraries in SVN do not build correctly on my
> > >>>>> machine, so they error in the full source tarball.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Do we really need the full source tarball? As I understand it, it is
> > >>>>> better for Linux users to use system libraries when possible. For
> > >>>>> Windows developers I'd have thought they world be better to use SVN
> > >>>>> than a tarball.
> > >>
> > >> I defer to Linux experts.
> > >
> > > I guess that the minsrc tarball is sufficient for most Linux users. We
> > > always use the minsrc tarball in Debian/Ubuntu and nyquist is the only
> > > library that we need from the lib-src directory. From a Linux user
> > > perspective, the full source tarball could go away.
> > >
> > > I think it makes sense to keep the full source tarball and use it for
> > > the Windows (and Mac?) builds. Then you can point user of your built
> > > binaries to the corresponding source tarballs. This is in my opinion
> > > easier than to point to a specific revision of an svn checkout.
> > >
> >
> > Okay, thanks, but I don't think we have resources to do full tarball
> > this release, as was pretty extensively discussed.
> >
> > If I'm incorrect about that, sure, let's do it. We're certainly
> > resource-limited, so I think we should not spend a lot of effort on
> > icing the cake.
>
> The maketarball.sh script uses:
>
> ./configure --enable-maintainer-mode --with-libsndfile=local --with-lib-preference=\"local system\"
>
> As I understand it, if you try to build all the libs needed for the
> fullsrc using that ./configure, you end up with a failed configure
> "fails with unexpected EOF's at line 8525 and 8526" or similar
> (I can confirm that).
I tried to fix that configure issue and fixed various stuff along the way.

1) maketarball-check-for-prerequisites.patch: This patch adds tests for
the scripts that are needed by maketarball.sh and will fail upfront
instead of silently producing broken configure script and such.

2) maketarball-drop-unneeded-configure-flag.patch: The configure flag
--with-libsndfile=local is not needed, because
--with-lib-preference="local system" already prefers a local library
over a system library.

3) maketarball-replace-existing.patch: The maketarball.sh will fail to
xz-compress the tarballs, if the resulting .tar.xz files already exist.
This patch remove possible existing .tar.xz files before creating the
new ones.

4) fail-on-error.patch: Failures on clean or distclean were ignore. The
patch will produce a failure if a Makefile exist and the clean/distclean
target fails. Note: expat has no distclean target and therefore the
clean target is used on distclean.

With these patches, the resulting fullsrc tarball works correctly if
system libraries for libvorbis, libmad, and libsndfile are used. Do you
want this tarball? While investigating, I tried to make autoreconf
working. These patches are a starting point:

5) autoconf-warning-v5.patch: AC_CONFIG_SUBDIRS needs to take static
strings. Dynamically evaluated variables are not allowed.

6) autoreconf-libsamplerate.patch: ACLOCAL_AMFLAGS should be set it
Makefile.am to let autoreconf find the directory with the m4 scripts.

7) autoreconf-libsndfile.patch: ACLOCAL_AMFLAGS should be set it
Makefile.am to let autoreconf find the directory with the m4 scripts.

--
Benjamin Drung
Debian & Ubuntu Developer

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS,
MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current
with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft
MVPs and experts. ON SALE this month only -- learn more at:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_123012
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel

autoconf-warning-v5.patch (14K) Download Attachment
autoreconf-libsamplerate.patch (359 bytes) Download Attachment
autoreconf-libsndfile.patch (330 bytes) Download Attachment
fail-on-error.patch (5K) Download Attachment
maketarball-check-for-prerequisites.patch (1K) Download Attachment
maketarball-drop-unneeded-configure-flag.patch (549 bytes) Download Attachment
maketarball-replace-existing.patch (846 bytes) Download Attachment
123
Loading...