On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 09:03:15PM -1000, Joel Roth wrote: > On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 05:40:06PM -0400, S. Massy wrote: > > On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 09:01:35AM -1000, Joel Roth wrote: > > And a big one: > > + How difficult/labour-intensive would it be to add LV2 support to nama > > before a potential release? Should we just let the code stabilise (i.e > > Julien and I whacking the rug till all the bugs fall out) first? > > Personally, I'm not panting, since my workflow with LADSPA is quite > > well-established, but it definitely would look terrific on the release > > notes. :) > > Where are the docs for using LV2 under Ecasound? The only different commands are lv2-register and, to add the op: -elv2:uri_of_plugin,param1,[...],paramN You can use cop-* and copp-* for the rest. > > I just installed a bunch of lv2 libraries and plugins, but > the Ecasound configure script still doesn't turn on this feature. If you have lv22 1.0, it should work automatically. If you have 0.5.0, as I do, you need to edit /usr/include/lilv-0/lilv/lilvmm.hpp line 24 to read: static const char* uri_to_path(const char* uri) { return lilv_uri_to_path(uri); } (just make it static) ...then use --enable-liblilv when configuring to force lv2 support. > > If Ecasound lets you use LV2 plugins the same way as other > effects, all I need to do is parse the output of > lv2-register, which is similar to the parsing we already do for > ladspa-register, cop-register, etc. That's what I thought. However, if you want extra info, just like you get from analyseplugin, you'll need to parse the output from a utility like lv2info. Besides that, we would need to have a simpler way to refer to the plugins than the ridiculously long URIs they use. > > Sounds like gravy to me! Like I said, it would definitely be cool, though not an absolute must-have for me at this point. LV2 definitely seems to be the new format of choice though... Cheers, S.M.