From green at redhat.com Thu Jan 17 16:52:50 2008 From: green at redhat.com (Anthony Green) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 08:52:50 -0800 Subject: [Fedora-music-list] Ardour 2.2 upgrade issue Message-ID: <478F87E2.7080008@redhat.com> I was looking at upgrading ardour to 2.2 for f8 and devel when I came across the following note: Important note for upgrading from 2.1 or earlier Please note that for several of the new features and fixes listed below, it is necessary to remove or update the following files if you have them in your ~/.ardour2 directory: * ardour2_ui.rc * ardour.bindings * ardour2_ui.conf We have still not come up with an easy way to "upgrade" per-user files when we change key bindings, the menu structures and add/remove various UI color codes. So... how should we handle this in our package? It seems nasty to do something like "rm /home/*/.ardour2/ardour2_ui.rc" at install time, but that might still be the best way to deal with this. Or....? AG From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Thu Jan 17 17:54:57 2008 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 18:54:57 +0100 Subject: [Fedora-music-list] Ardour 2.2 upgrade issue In-Reply-To: <478F87E2.7080008@redhat.com> References: <478F87E2.7080008@redhat.com> Message-ID: <478F9671.7080600@hhs.nl> Anthony Green wrote: > I was looking at upgrading ardour to 2.2 for f8 and devel when I came > across the following note: > > > Important note for upgrading from 2.1 or earlier > > Please note that for several of the new features and fixes listed below, > it is necessary to remove or update the following files if you have them > in your ~/.ardour2 directory: > > * ardour2_ui.rc > * ardour.bindings > * ardour2_ui.conf > > We have still not come up with an easy way to "upgrade" per-user files > when we change key bindings, the menu structures and add/remove various > UI color codes. > > > So... how should we handle this in our package? It seems nasty to do > something like "rm /home/*/.ardour2/ardour2_ui.rc" at install time, but > that might still be the best way to deal with this. > Or....? > I think it would be best to put the real ardour binary under /usr/libexec and put a bash script called ardour under /usr/bin, this script could then check for an ~/.ardour2/ardourver2.2 file, and if that not exits remove the 3 files mentioned above (if they exist, or use rm -f), then it would touch ~/.ardour2/ardourver2.2 (after an mkdir -p ~/.ardour2) and finally end with: exec /usr/libexec/ardour "$@" Regards, Hans From green at redhat.com Tue Jan 22 07:32:48 2008 From: green at redhat.com (Anthony Green) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 23:32:48 -0800 Subject: [Fedora-music-list] Ardour 2.2 upgrade issue In-Reply-To: <478F9671.7080600@hhs.nl> References: <478F87E2.7080008@redhat.com> <478F9671.7080600@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <47959C20.6000801@redhat.com> Hans de Goede wrote: > I think it would be best to put the real ardour binary under > /usr/libexec and put a bash script called ardour under /usr/bin, this > script could then check for an ~/.ardour2/ardourver2.2 file, and if > that not exits remove the 3 files mentioned above (if they exist, or > use rm -f), then it would touch ~/.ardour2/ardourver2.2 (after an > mkdir -p ~/.ardour2) and finally end with: > exec /usr/libexec/ardour "$@" > Ok, I've kicked off a devel build of ardour 2.2 with the changes you described. It should show up in rawhide soon (assuming the build completes). Please have a look if you can. If it looks good, then I'll probably push it out to F8 as well. Thanks, AG From nando at ccrma.Stanford.EDU Tue Jan 22 18:28:44 2008 From: nando at ccrma.Stanford.EDU (Fernando Lopez-Lezcano) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 10:28:44 -0800 Subject: [Fedora-music-list] Ardour 2.2 upgrade issue In-Reply-To: <47959C20.6000801@redhat.com> References: <478F87E2.7080008@redhat.com> <478F9671.7080600@hhs.nl> <47959C20.6000801@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1201026524.3375.5.camel@cmn3.stanford.edu> On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 23:32 -0800, Anthony Green wrote: > Hans de Goede wrote: > > I think it would be best to put the real ardour binary under > > /usr/libexec and put a bash script called ardour under /usr/bin, this > > script could then check for an ~/.ardour2/ardourver2.2 file, and if > > that not exits remove the 3 files mentioned above (if they exist, or > > use rm -f), then it would touch ~/.ardour2/ardourver2.2 (after an > > mkdir -p ~/.ardour2) and finally end with: > > exec /usr/libexec/ardour "$@" Wouldn't it be better to mv the three files to .back files or something like that? Those files might have customizations that the user did and erasing them outright does not seem like the best option to me. > Ok, I've kicked off a devel build of ardour 2.2 with the changes you > described. It should show up in rawhide soon (assuming the build > completes). Please have a look if you can. If it looks good, then I'll > probably push it out to F8 as well. And to f7 as well? -- Fernando From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Tue Jan 22 19:41:05 2008 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 20:41:05 +0100 Subject: [Fedora-music-list] Ardour 2.2 upgrade issue In-Reply-To: <1201026524.3375.5.camel@cmn3.stanford.edu> References: <478F87E2.7080008@redhat.com> <478F9671.7080600@hhs.nl> <47959C20.6000801@redhat.com> <1201026524.3375.5.camel@cmn3.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <479646D1.6000309@hhs.nl> On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 23:32 -0800, Anthony Green wrote: > Ok, I've kicked off a devel build of ardour 2.2 with the changes you > described. It should show up in rawhide soon (assuming the build > completes). Please have a look if you can. If it looks good, then I'll > probably push it out to F8 as well. > Erm, your script doesn't do a "mkdir -p ~/.ardour2" Before the touch, so for a first time ardour user (without an ~/.ardour2 dir) the touch will fail, nothing fatal, but this will cause an anoying / confusing error message if the user starts ardour from a shell the first time. The -p is so that mkdit doesn't complain if the dir already exits. Regards, Hans From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Tue Jan 22 19:42:25 2008 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 20:42:25 +0100 Subject: [Fedora-music-list] Ardour 2.2 upgrade issue In-Reply-To: <1201026524.3375.5.camel@cmn3.stanford.edu> References: <478F87E2.7080008@redhat.com> <478F9671.7080600@hhs.nl> <47959C20.6000801@redhat.com> <1201026524.3375.5.camel@cmn3.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <47964721.9040200@hhs.nl> Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote: > On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 23:32 -0800, Anthony Green wrote: >> Hans de Goede wrote: >>> I think it would be best to put the real ardour binary under >>> /usr/libexec and put a bash script called ardour under /usr/bin, this >>> script could then check for an ~/.ardour2/ardourver2.2 file, and if >>> that not exits remove the 3 files mentioned above (if they exist, or >>> use rm -f), then it would touch ~/.ardour2/ardourver2.2 (after an >>> mkdir -p ~/.ardour2) and finally end with: >>> exec /usr/libexec/ardour "$@" > > Wouldn't it be better to mv the three files to .back files or something > like that? Those files might have customizations that the user did and > erasing them outright does not seem like the best option to me. > That sounds reasonable, yes. Regards, Hans From green at redhat.com Tue Jan 22 22:09:54 2008 From: green at redhat.com (Anthony Green) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 14:09:54 -0800 Subject: [Fedora-music-list] Ardour 2.2 upgrade issue In-Reply-To: <1201026524.3375.5.camel@cmn3.stanford.edu> References: <478F87E2.7080008@redhat.com> <478F9671.7080600@hhs.nl> <47959C20.6000801@redhat.com> <1201026524.3375.5.camel@cmn3.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <479669B2.40803@redhat.com> Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote: > On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 23:32 -0800, Anthony Green wrote: > >> Hans de Goede wrote: >> >>> I think it would be best to put the real ardour binary under >>> /usr/libexec and put a bash script called ardour under /usr/bin, this >>> script could then check for an ~/.ardour2/ardourver2.2 file, and if >>> that not exits remove the 3 files mentioned above (if they exist, or >>> use rm -f), then it would touch ~/.ardour2/ardourver2.2 (after an >>> mkdir -p ~/.ardour2) and finally end with: >>> exec /usr/libexec/ardour "$@" >>> > > Wouldn't it be better to mv the three files to .back files or something > like that? Those files might have customizations that the user did and > erasing them outright does not seem like the best option to me. > Ok, done (as well as the mkdir -p that Hans pointed out). It's building in rawhide right now. >> Ok, I've kicked off a devel build of ardour 2.2 with the changes you >> described. It should show up in rawhide soon (assuming the build >> completes). Please have a look if you can. If it looks good, then I'll >> probably push it out to F8 as well. >> > > And to f7 as well? > -- Fernando > Ok. AG From mschwendt at gmail.com Wed Jan 23 21:06:01 2008 From: mschwendt at gmail.com (Michael Schwendt) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 22:06:01 +0100 Subject: [Fedora-music-list] Audacity post-1.3.4-beta builds for testers (20080123) Message-ID: <440f31f60801231306m658d6e14u3c30942afac4f711@mail.gmail.com> New Fedora 8 binaries of Audacity (CVS snapshot from 20080123) for i386 and x86_64 can be found here: http://mschwendt.fedorapeople.org/audacity/ PPC/ppc64 builds are only available in koji until they expire: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=368663 PortAudio v19 in Audacity has seen enough changes as to improve ALSA support here compared with Audacity 1.3.3-beta and 1.3.4-beta. JACK support is built in again, but still might be disabled by default in one of upstream's next releases. Please keep success/failure reports coming... > Hi everyone! > > Fedora 8, 7 and 6 still contain Audacity 1.3.2-beta. There have been > two new beta releases since then. Sooner or later somebody surely will > open a ticket and use reproachful words when requesting an upgrade to > 1.3.4-beta, just because it's newer. So, here's some sort of status > update and the opportunity for the community to help with evaluating > that latest beta release. We, the packagers, appreciate all forms of > success and failure reports as well as feedback sent to the Audacity > developers upstream. > > Fedora 8 binaries of Audacity 1.3.4-beta for i386 and x86_64 can be found here: > > http://mschwendt.fedorapeople.org/audacity/ > > They are not signed, but the directory contains a SHA1SUMs file signed > with my key. > > The source of these packages can be found in Fedora Package CVS, of > course, albeit in a separate devel branch. A README file in the > rpms/audacity directory contains a few notes about that branch: > http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewcvs/rpms/audacity/README?rev=1.7&view=markup > > The packages were built with wxGTK 2.8.4 as included with Fedora 8 and > no longer with wxGTK 2.6.x. This may result in changes in the GUI. -snip- > Anyway, I'm interested in success and problem reports, and I'm even > more interested in anybody's attempts at reporting problems to the > upstream developers. > From Lam at Lam.pl Sat Jan 26 21:22:11 2008 From: Lam at Lam.pl (Leszek Matok) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 22:22:11 +0100 Subject: [Fedora-music-list] Audacity post-1.3.4-beta builds for testers (20080123) In-Reply-To: <440f31f60801231306m658d6e14u3c30942afac4f711@mail.gmail.com> References: <440f31f60801231306m658d6e14u3c30942afac4f711@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080126222211.7c333823@pensja.lam.pl> Dnia 2008-01-23, o godz. 22:06:01 "Michael Schwendt" napisa?(a): > New Fedora 8 binaries of Audacity (CVS snapshot from 20080123) for > i386 and x86_64 can be found here: Thanks! > PortAudio v19 in Audacity has seen enough changes as to improve ALSA > support here compared with Audacity 1.3.3-beta and 1.3.4-beta. JACK > support is built in again, but still might be disabled by default in > one of upstream's next releases. Well, it needs a full restart to see or stop seeing a device, be it JACK sink/source (which can appear and disappear) or an ALSA input/output device (which can be busy when Audacity starts). If I use JACK-aware filter taking input from physical line-in, but I want to record unfiltered sound from the microphone too (the sound card has one "input" switching mode using the mixer), I have to stop the filter program and restart Audacity to see the ALSA device, then start the filter program and restart Audacity to see the JACK device. Not very productive. And for the first time, preferences menu needed a really long time to appear (probably probing for devices). Other then that, it runs and appears to play audio. I haven't really tested any features. Maybe some other time in the upcoming week. Lam -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From christoph at linuxsoup.com Mon Jan 28 14:05:15 2008 From: christoph at linuxsoup.com (Christoph) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 09:05:15 -0500 Subject: [Fedora-music-list] Upcoming (possible) presentation in Boston In-Reply-To: <472FC02B.9000605@redhat.com> References: <472FC02B.9000605@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1201529115.4633.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> Hi all, I'd like to do a high-level presentation on fedora-music for my local LUG in Boston MA in March '08. If it turns out ok, I'll repeat it for Nashua, NH. I might even be interested in trying to do something for Red Hat's Summit in Boston in June (ish). I use the platform mainly for Rosegarden and midi-sequencing, but obviously the project scope is much broader than this. My workstation is also heavily used for non-linear video editing (cinelerra) so I blend the 2 projects to create mini home movies. Are there any existing materials (papers, presentations, etc...) which I could tap to get my research jump started? Especially on topics of: + competitive landscape + industry standards (for things like midi sound fonts) + integrating 3rd products (like $$$ soundfonts) Thanks... christoph On Mon, 2007-11-05 at 17:15 -0800, Anthony Green wrote: > I just did an in-place fc6-to-f8 upgrade and it went pretty smoothly. > > One gotcha was I had to adjust the qjackd settings thusly: > > 1. Change "Server Path" on qjackctl's Setup page to "pasuspender jackd > --". This suspends PulseAudio so it isn't hogging the ALSA ports while > I'm running jackd. > > 2. Change the "Interface" setting to "hw:0" from "default". jackd > wouldn't start up otherwise. Any idea why? > > AG > > > _______________________________________________ > Fedora-music-list mailing list > Fedora-music-list at redhat.com > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-music-list