[pure-lang] Re: ANN: Pure 0.60

  • From: Roman Neuhauser <neuhauser@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: pure-lang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2014 14:46:37 +0200

# aggraef@xxxxxxxxx / 2014-03-24 10:47:38 +0100:
> I've been cooking this new release for a while now, but I finally
> decided that it tasted well enough, so without any further ado: Pure
> 0.60 is done and served, go grab it while its hot! :)

congratulations and thank you!

openSUSE packages are up-to-date, and there's more of them; remaining
to do are pd-faust, pd-pure, faust2pd and pure-tk-examples.  i started
(and dropped) the pd-related things earlier, need to revisit them now
that you made it easier and i won't have to struggle with the unorthodox
distributions of pd. ;)


> Arch/Manjaro pkgbuilds and packages should be up some time later
> today

i've started using ArchLinux on my laptop so this area is now on my
radar.  osc(1), the commandline client for the Build Service[1] works
in ArchLinux well enough to build openSUSE and ArchLinux packages.
osc is in AUR *and* the OBS (openSUSE Build Service)[2].
my plan is to have OBS build also ArchLinux packages for all the things
(OBS can also build Debian and Ubuntu packages if anyone's interested).
[1] https://build.opensuse.org/

> - pure-avahi and pure-bonjour give access to Zeroconf networking on
> Linux (using Avahi) and Mac (using, you guessed it, Bonjour). There's
> also a compatibility module zeroconf.pure which will work on both
> Linux and Mac, no matter what the underlying Zeroconf implementation
> is. I already put this to good use in the Pd TouchOSC MIDI bridge
> external (pd-touchosc) I wrote for this year's Linux Audio Conference.

should pure-bonjour build and work in Linux?  a comment in the Makefile
implies so, but the build failed for me.  i have zero knowledge of
Zeroconf so sorry if i'm talking out of my rear end.
while i'm here, pure-balls has been bugging me about pure-lv2 tarballs.
this particular module is published as tar.bz2, an isolated deviation
from the standard (within pure-*) tar.gz.  i could/should add support
for different compression formats, but in this specific case the
deviation seem silly to me:

-rw-r--r-- 1 roman roman 22487 Mar 24 08:57 pure-lv2-0.1.tar.bz2
-rw-r--r-- 1 roman roman 24644 Apr  8 14:14 pure-lv2-0.1.tar.gz

the gain is small and offset by the increased CPU/power requirements.
i'm not that much against bz2 per se, but if we want better compression
than gz provides, maybe going to tar.xz *across the board* would be
better choice?

pull request: https://bitbucket.org/purelang/pure-lang/pull-request/11


Other related posts: