[Sugar-devel] Fedora 15 SoaS release and Csound5

[Peter Robinson]

Art,

Setting buildRelease=1 to one has no affect on the build. With that set when
I look at the build logs it still reports building the new Parser. We use to
set buildRelease=0 in all previous releases. Why they would swap this around
is beyond me! Can you forward details on to them because I can never seem to
get onto their mailing list.

Peter

On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 2:20 AM, Art Hunkins <abhunkin at uncg.edu> wrote:

>  Peter,
>
> My feelings exactly.
>
> As regards Csound, most of our listservs are users; developers are
> relatively few and tend to communicate largely among themselves.
>
> Though I also am a member of csound-dev, I was unaware of the old/new
> parser status. I knew the new parser was (and has been long) "under
> development". I'd no idea how or if it was incorporated into Csound5.13.
>
> Only a few folk (not including myself) actually build Csound - mostly Linux
> people (again, not me). I just installed Windows Csound(5.13) this evening
> for the first time - to discover that it was built with default old parser.
> News to me.
>
> There's much discussion of Csound lists about how documentation and user
> materials are subpar - especially for newbees. This makes it overly
> difficult for Csound to attract new users.
>
> At any rate, thanks again for all you do. And I'm always here to test.
>
> Art Hunkins
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Peter Robinson <pbrobinson at gmail.com>
> *To:* Art Hunkins <abhunkin at uncg.edu>
> *Cc:* sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org ; Development of live Sugar
> distributions <soas at lists.sugarlabs.org>
> *Sent:* Monday, June 13, 2011 7:13 PM
> *Subject:* Re: Fedora 15 SoaS release and Csound5
>
> Art,
>
> It seems I did get the mail but some how missed it.
>
> Sigh! How so typical of CSound to make the new parser the default even
> though they themselves don't recommend it, nor do they really even document
> it anywhere! GRR!
>
> I'll have a look at the build and see what else it will affect, csound
> isn't just there for Sugar.
>
> Peter
>
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 11:05 PM, Art Hunkins <abhunkin at uncg.edu> wrote:
>
>> Peter -
>>
>> Did you ever receive the messages collated below? (They largely occurred
>> on the csound-dev list.)
>>
>> Are the questions you mentioned (ones that were never answered) the ones
>> addressed here?
>>
>> If not, please send them again. To my knowledge, the simple "Csound
>> solution" is running scons with the option:
>> buildRelease=1
>>
>> But maybe I completely misunderstand.
>>
>> Art Hunkins
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Art Hunkins" <abhunkin at uncg.edu>
>>
>> To: <sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org>
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2011 9:59 AM
>>
>> Subject: Re: Fedora 15 SoaS release and Csound5
>>
>>
>> Peter:
>>>
>>> I presume you received the messages immediately listed below, regarding a
>>> solution to the old/new Csound parser issue ("build csound with the scons
>>> option  buildRelease=1").
>>>
>>> If you sent questions either to this group, or the Csound-developers
>>> list, I'm sorry; I didn't receive them. Are they perhaps answered in the
>>> messages quoted below?
>>>
>>> Also, as I wrote to you a week or so ago, there are no current MIDI
>>> issues with Csound and Sugar. (I had mistakenly thought there were earlier.)
>>>
>>> I remain eager to test a rebuilt Csound in the Fedora 15 SoaS context, to
>>> determine if my activities are compatible - and look forward to your
>>> upcoming test release.
>>>
>>> Thanks again for all your work on behalf of things musical within SoaS.
>>>
>>> Art Hunkins
>>>
>>> -------
>>> (Message to csound development listserv)
>>>
>>> Steve, Victor and Peter Robinson:
>>>
>>> The run-time (CsOptions) flag --old-parser makes my CSD's run flawlessly.
>>> (Thanks for the suggestion/solution, Steve.)
>>>
>>> I don't imagine my CSD's are the only ones affected.
>>>
>>> Peter, I'd strongly recommend Victor's suggestion of incorporating the
>>> scons option buildRelease=1 into the Csound build for Fedora 15. (For one
>>> thing, it would for the time being not require changes to my Activities.)
>>>
>>> Comments anyone?
>>>
>>> Art Hunkins
>>>
>>>  From: Victor Lazzarini
>>>  To: Developer discussions
>>>  Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2011 4:42 PM
>>>  Subject: Re: [Cs-dev] Fw: Csound - CsOptions flag for old parser?
>>>
>>>
>>>  That is a run-time option. But if you build csound with the scons
>>>  option buildRelease=1, the old parser
>>>  should be the default. This is the recommended (new parser is no ready
>>> for big time yet).
>>>
>>>
>>>  Victor
>>>
>>>  On 1 Jun 2011, at 21:30, Peter Robinson wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>   Hi Steve,
>>>
>>>   Is that a compile or run time option? If the former what are the
>>> implications?
>>>
>>>   Peter
>>>
>>>   On 1 Jun 2011 21:18, "Steven Yi" <stevenyi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>  Dr Victor Lazzarini
>>>  Senior Lecturer
>>>  Dept. of Music
>>>  NUI Maynooth Ireland
>>>  tel.: +353 1 708 3545
>>>  Victor dot Lazzarini AT nuim dot ie
>>>
>>>
>>>  ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Robinson" <
>>> pbrobinson at gmail.com>
>>> To: "Art Hunkins" <abhunkin at uncg.edu>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2011 4:48 AM
>>> Subject: Re: Fedora 15 SoaS release and Csound5
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Art,
>>>>
>>>> No idea. I replied to the email you CC:ed me on and had no answers to
>>>> my questions. I have a couple of outstanding items I need to test and
>>>> fix on SoaS and will put out a test image in the next couple of days
>>>> and you can test it and tell me as you well no I have no ability to
>>>> test midi on soas.
>>>>
>>>> As a side note please make sure you:
>>>> 1) Create a new email when sending things and no hijack a completely
>>>> irrelevant email.
>>>> 2) Send it to the SoaS list. There is no need to send this directly to
>>>> me.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Peter
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 11:23 PM, Art Hunkins <abhunkin at uncg.edu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello, Peter,
>>>>>
>>>>> Is the Csound5 new/old parser issue now solved for the upcoming Fedora
>>>>> 15
>>>>> SoaS release?
>>>>>
>>>>> If so, is there a testing .iso I could try - to see if my activities
>>>>> are
>>>>> compatible with it?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks -
>>>>>
>>>>> Art Hunkins
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20110614/4c7f4485/attachment-0001.html>