[Ardour-Users] Ardour 2.8 released

[Fernando Lopez-Lezcano]

On Sat, 2009-03-28 at 22:53 -0400, Paul Davis wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 10:33 PM, Kevin Cosgrove <kevinc at cosgroves.us> wrote:
> >
> > On 28 March 2009 at 18:39, Paul Davis <paul at linuxaudiosystems.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 3:55 PM, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano
> >> <nando at ccrma.stanford.edu> wrote:
> >>
> >> > My suggestion (from the packager point of view) would be to make it
> >> > possible to do two successive builds of ardour on the same source tree,
> >> > one with vst enabled and one without it (with maybe a scons clean in
> >> > between?). Files generated should not conflict in naming. A scons
> >> > install after that should install both versions in the same DESTDIR.
> >>
> >> that seems pretty hard ... you want to build twice (possibly with a
> >> clean between) and then have the install step install the results of
> >> both builds?
> >
> > I've seen packages like that.  I think vim is one like that.
> > But, I might not remember vim correctly.  If it works out best
> > from a packaging perspective, then I would have no problem with
> > that.  I've built a lot of RPM packages, hundreds.  Most of the
> > time this isn't needed.  It's build-time config changes that
> > usually drive this, and that's what ardour-vst is facing.
> 
> how about this:
> 
> if you run scons VST=1, it first checks to see that everything is
> already built. if not, it tells you to run with VST=0. if so, it
> proceeds to build the two new components (libardourgtk and the win32
> executable). at the end of the process, scons install will install the
> whole enchilada. there will be 2 new libraries (libardourgtk and
> libardourvst) and 2 new bin-located files, the ardourvst shell script
> and the win32 executable.

That sounds reasonable. As long as the end result are two separate
programs that can be somehow segregated into two (or more) packages then
we should be fine. 

> sound ok? this is risky in theory because if VST_SUPPORT ever gets
> used outside the gtk2_ardour and libs/ardour directories, the build
> will be corrupt, but at present these are the only places where it
> matters.

This part I don't quite follow...
-- Fernando