Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Aug 21, 2023. It is now read-only.

Fedora support #244

Open
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

richardhenwood
Copy link

Rebase of @ycollet work, so it can merge.

@richardhenwood
Copy link
Author

@falkTX : This is rebase of the ycollet patches for fedora support. If you choose to merge this (which would be great!) you can close #162 and #122 .

PS. I couldn't figure out a way to update #162 with this simple rebase, so I've issued a new pull request from my fork.

@falkTX
Copy link
Owner

falkTX commented Feb 12, 2019

The PR is clean enough, I would just adapt it a little bit for personal preference.

  1. LIB_PATH should to be stored in a common place, so we can define it just once and import it where needed.
    to make it does not conflict with debian packages, I suggest having the check as this:
if os.path.isdir("/usr/lib64") and os.path.exists("/bin/rpm")
    LIBDIR = "/usr/lib64"
else:
    LIBDIR = "/usr/lib"
  1. Using "string" + varname + "string" syntax is quite ugly, and does not fit the rest of the code.
    Use either "string %s %smore stuff" % (var1, var2) or "string stuff {} {} more stuff".format(var1, ...)"

@ycollet
Copy link

ycollet commented Feb 12, 2019 via email

@richardhenwood
Copy link
Author

@falkTX : 1. I don't have a good understanding of the project architecture. It looks to me like lib_path is only used in claudia_launcher.py, and so from my naive perspective, the current self.lib_path definition seems 'good enough'. I am happy to make changes, I just need a bit more guidance.

  1. Yes, I like the 'format' syntax. I've added a new commit new use that.

last_pos = 0
for i in range(utils.get_cached_plugin_count(PLUGIN_LV2, os.getenv("LV2_PATH", "~/.lv2:/usr/" + self.lib_path + "/lv2:/usr/local/" + self.lib_path + "/lv2"))):
for i in range(utils.get_cached_plugin_count(PLUGIN_LV2,
os.getenv("LV2_PATH",
Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

previous code had the default value stored in a variable.
if you do that, you should no longer need to split the string into multiple lines

@falkTX
Copy link
Owner

falkTX commented Feb 14, 2019

Thanks for the commit-fix.
What I mean with the first point is that the check for "/usr/lib64" is done in 2 different places.
I would preferably do that in a single shared place instead.

@richardhenwood
Copy link
Author

richardhenwood commented Mar 7, 2019

I've got a bit confused about where I am with this pull request after some time away. It looks like I've made the check global in 'shared_cadence.py'. @falkTX do you see this recent change - and do you have more feedback?

@richardhenwood
Copy link
Author

oops. I see the current change doesn't work in practice. I'll fix and update this PR.

@richardhenwood
Copy link
Author

Ok, I fixed a typo, and tested successfully: @falkTX any more suggestions?

@falkTX
Copy link
Owner

falkTX commented Mar 9, 2019

I would manually do some small things, but PR is okay as it is right now.
I am not just doing work in cadence right now. will come back to it later in the year.

@richardhenwood
Copy link
Author

@falkTX is it late enough in this year to consider this merge? :)

@simotek
Copy link

simotek commented May 28, 2021

The PR is clean enough, I would just adapt it a little bit for personal preference.

1. `LIB_PATH` should to be stored in a common place, so we can define it just once and import it where needed.
   to make it does not conflict with debian packages, I suggest having the check as this:
if os.path.isdir("/usr/lib64") and os.path.exists("/bin/rpm")
    LIBDIR = "/usr/lib64"
else:
    LIBDIR = "/usr/lib"

Technically I think this would probably break i586 / i686 and probably also 32bit arm

@simotek
Copy link

simotek commented May 31, 2021

Carla suffers from the same issue, but i'll wait for you decide how to fix it here to submit something there.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants