Hi all,
I would like to propose a new SIG for audio production.
This would primarily cover to setup a digital audio workstation. I started to build some packages for this like plugins, configurations and a realtime kernel (built from git.centos.org) for a public repository. During doing all this stuff I thought of founding a SIG.
I think, CentOS will be the right distribution for this, because it is really stable, reliable and long term supported.
Regards Tim
On 02/17/2016 04:42 PM, Tim wrote:
I would like to propose a new SIG for audio production.
This would primarily cover to setup a digital audio workstation. I started to build some packages for this like plugins, configurations and a realtime kernel (built from git.centos.org http://git.centos.org) for a public repository. During doing all this stuff I thought of founding a SIG.
I think, CentOS will be the right distribution for this, because it is really stable, reliable and long term supported.
This sounds nice; I personally use Harrison Mixbus on CentOS 7 professionally in doing multitrack high-end production, and it is indeed stable. Support for more pro-audio devices and pro-audio 'things' would be very nice.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 17/02/16 22:42, Tim wrote:
Hi all,
I would like to propose a new SIG for audio production.
This would primarily cover to setup a digital audio workstation. I started to build some packages for this like plugins, configurations and a realtime kernel (built from git.centos.org http://git.centos.org) for a public repository. During doing all this stuff I thought of founding a SIG.
I think, CentOS will be the right distribution for this, because it is really stable, reliable and long term supported.
Regards Tim
I thought myself about a SIG, even if wasn't sure about interest from other people. What I did (for my own usage) was (re)building some packages like lmms/ardour/calf/hydrogen for my own needs in a copr repo : https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/arrfab/DAW-7/ Also had some requests for the centosplus kernel, to allow the line6_usb kernel module (for my Line6 toneport ux2) : https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=9569
- -- Fabian Arrotin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org gpg key: 56BEC54E | twitter: @arrfab
The same intension lead me to build a repo. For now a can't publish a url because I only have a shared webspace and my hoster would close it when there will be too much traffic. So I was thinking of hiring a vserver. But possibly there is another solution like copr I can use for this?
I have build several RPMS/SRPMS for audio production. For now it is: kernel-rt 3.10.0-327.4.5.rt56 (including all subpackages - spec-file needed bug cleaning in line 684*) rt-setup rtctl tuned-profiles-realtime 2.5.1 calf 0.0.60 eq10q 2.0 alsa-tools 1.0.28 (redhat only provides alsa-tools-firmware and so centos does) fluidsynth 1.1.6 lv2 1.10.0 qjackctl 0.3.12
There are several packages to add. I also have build a configuration RPM that will create udev-rules to grant access to /dev/rtc0 and /dev/hpet for group 'realtime' and a file for sysctl to adjust vm.swappiness and fs.inotify.max_user_watches
Regards Tim
* I changed mv %{name}-%{rpmversion}-%{pkg_release_simple}%{dist} vanilla-%{kversion}; to mv %{name}-%{rpmversion}-%{pkg_release_simple}* vanilla-%{kversion};
because I wanted to build for dist el7 and not default dist el7_2
Am 17.02.2016 um 23:44 schrieb Fabian Arrotin:
On 17/02/16 22:42, Tim wrote:
Hi all,
I would like to propose a new SIG for audio production.
This would primarily cover to setup a digital audio workstation. I started to build some packages for this like plugins, configurations and a realtime kernel (built from git.centos.org http://git.centos.org) for a public repository. During doing all this stuff I thought of founding a SIG.
I think, CentOS will be the right distribution for this, because it is really stable, reliable and long term supported.
Regards Tim
I thought myself about a SIG, even if wasn't sure about interest from other people. What I did (for my own usage) was (re)building some packages like lmms/ardour/calf/hydrogen for my own needs in a copr repo : https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/arrfab/DAW-7/ Also had some requests for the centosplus kernel, to allow the line6_usb kernel module (for my Line6 toneport ux2) : https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=9569
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On 02/18/2016 04:56 AM, Tim wrote:
I have build several RPMS/SRPMS for audio production. ...
There are several packages to add. I also have build a configuration RPM that will create udev-rules to grant access to /dev/rtc0 and /dev/hpet for group 'realtime' and a file for sysctl to adjust vm.swappiness and fs.inotify.max_user_watches
Your package list is a good start. Do note that an older version of calf is in the nux repo that includes both the LV2 and LADSPA versions, but it is definitely older than the one you have packaged. QJackCtl is a nice one, too. I definitely am looking forward to seeing what you come up with. Heh, time to dig out my Tascam US224 and US428 again to check for compatibility, and it really is time for someone to figure out how to force a particular USB endpoint to go to UHCI or OHCI and bypass EHCI for the Tascam US-144 and US-122L, or reverse-engineer the USB 2 protocols...... I'm concerned about the US-x2y stuff, though, since last I tried on a kernel > 3.8 the US-224 would KP the box under AVLinux 6 when any program opened the device, but I haven't tried it with C7 for some reason. I have a US-428 buried on my desk; time to do some digging and prepare to grab a KP and troubleshoot.
Having alsa-tools is wonderful, but getting mudita24 for all those Envy24/ICE1712 cards out there like the Delta 1010, 44, 66, and certain revisions of the 1010LT (I have one of these in a C7 machine at home, and I hand-built mudita24 for it, and it works well), as well as echomixer for all the Echo Audio stuff out there (I have an old first-gen 20-bit Layla on which I can test). And it's about time I put together that package of the dat-tools for using SGI-firmware-bearing Seagate DDS DAT drives for pulling audio off of DATs...... that's the only reason I keep my Purple Indigo2 IMPACT system running with IRIX is to use my SGI DAT drive with the IRIX audio software to pull audio from DATs. But that's in the future......
On the patent-encumbered codec front, for decoding MP3's the Fluendo codec is or was no-cost, and I think that codec should be the one pointed to if any. Nux has 'the rest.' But Johnny's exactly right about a SIG of CentOS and patent-encumbrance issues related to being under US copyright and patent laws.
I'm actually running Mixbus on one of my three screens right now as I type this for my weekly production tasks......
Hey Lamar,
I packaged alsa-tools as it is but without hwmixvolume because this has a dependency to python-alsa which is not provided by centos-base or centos-updates.
Take a look here: https://git.centos.org/blob/rpms!alsa-tools/4590a5d5a9399b097bf20e5144201333...
Mudita seems to be based on envy24control which is part of alsa-tools.
I think packages should be devided into two groups: 1. System preparation and configuration: Realtime kernel Tuned profiles Realtime related configuration files 2. Audio applications: DAW software (Ardour, Rose garden,...) Plugins Midi stuff Whatever...
BTW: It seems, no distribution has calf 0.0.60. Even Fedora has 0.0.19. And there nice improvements. :-)
Regards Tim
Am 18. Februar 2016 17:34:22 MEZ, schrieb Lamar Owen lowen@pari.edu:
On 02/18/2016 04:56 AM, Tim wrote:
I have build several RPMS/SRPMS for audio production. ...
There are several packages to add. I also have build a configuration
RPM
that will create udev-rules to grant access to /dev/rtc0 and
/dev/hpet
for group 'realtime' and a file for sysctl to adjust vm.swappiness
and
fs.inotify.max_user_watches
Your package list is a good start. Do note that an older version of calf is in the nux repo that includes both the LV2 and LADSPA versions,
but it is definitely older than the one you have packaged. QJackCtl is
a nice one, too. I definitely am looking forward to seeing what you come up with. Heh, time to dig out my Tascam US224 and US428 again to check for compatibility, and it really is time for someone to figure out how to force a particular USB endpoint to go to UHCI or OHCI and bypass
EHCI for the Tascam US-144 and US-122L, or reverse-engineer the USB 2 protocols...... I'm concerned about the US-x2y stuff, though, since last I tried on a kernel > 3.8 the US-224 would KP the box under AVLinux 6 when any program opened the device, but I haven't tried it with C7 for some reason. I have a US-428 buried on my desk; time to do some digging and prepare to grab a KP and troubleshoot.
Having alsa-tools is wonderful, but getting mudita24 for all those Envy24/ICE1712 cards out there like the Delta 1010, 44, 66, and certain
revisions of the 1010LT (I have one of these in a C7 machine at home, and I hand-built mudita24 for it, and it works well), as well as echomixer for all the Echo Audio stuff out there (I have an old first-gen 20-bit Layla on which I can test). And it's about time I put
together that package of the dat-tools for using SGI-firmware-bearing Seagate DDS DAT drives for pulling audio off of DATs...... that's the only reason I keep my Purple Indigo2 IMPACT system running with IRIX is
to use my SGI DAT drive with the IRIX audio software to pull audio from
DATs. But that's in the future......
On the patent-encumbered codec front, for decoding MP3's the Fluendo codec is or was no-cost, and I think that codec should be the one pointed to if any. Nux has 'the rest.' But Johnny's exactly right about a SIG of CentOS and patent-encumbrance issues related to being under US copyright and patent laws.
I'm actually running Mixbus on one of my three screens right now as I type this for my weekly production tasks......
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
Hey list,
it seems that at least two board members would support an audio production SIG.
What would be the next step?
Regards Tim
Am 18. Februar 2016 18:55:28 MEZ, schrieb Tim lists@kiuni.de:
Hey Lamar,
I packaged alsa-tools as it is but without hwmixvolume because this has a dependency to python-alsa which is not provided by centos-base or centos-updates.
Take a look here: https://git.centos.org/blob/rpms!alsa-tools/4590a5d5a9399b097bf20e5144201333...
Mudita seems to be based on envy24control which is part of alsa-tools.
I think packages should be devided into two groups:
- System preparation and configuration:
Realtime kernel Tuned profiles Realtime related configuration files 2. Audio applications: DAW software (Ardour, Rose garden,...) Plugins Midi stuff Whatever...
BTW: It seems, no distribution has calf 0.0.60. Even Fedora has 0.0.19. And there nice improvements. :-)
Regards Tim
Am 18. Februar 2016 17:34:22 MEZ, schrieb Lamar Owen lowen@pari.edu:
On 02/18/2016 04:56 AM, Tim wrote:
I have build several RPMS/SRPMS for audio production. ...
There are several packages to add. I also have build a configuration
RPM
that will create udev-rules to grant access to /dev/rtc0 and
/dev/hpet
for group 'realtime' and a file for sysctl to adjust vm.swappiness
and
fs.inotify.max_user_watches
Your package list is a good start. Do note that an older version of calf is in the nux repo that includes both the LV2 and LADSPA
versions,
but it is definitely older than the one you have packaged. QJackCtl
is
a nice one, too. I definitely am looking forward to seeing what you come up with. Heh, time to dig out my Tascam US224 and US428 again to
check for compatibility, and it really is time for someone to figure out how to force a particular USB endpoint to go to UHCI or OHCI and
bypass
EHCI for the Tascam US-144 and US-122L, or reverse-engineer the USB 2 protocols...... I'm concerned about the US-x2y stuff, though, since last I tried on a kernel > 3.8 the US-224 would KP the box under AVLinux 6 when any program opened the device, but I haven't tried it with C7 for
some reason. I have a US-428 buried on my desk; time to do some digging and prepare to grab a KP and troubleshoot.
Having alsa-tools is wonderful, but getting mudita24 for all those Envy24/ICE1712 cards out there like the Delta 1010, 44, 66, and
certain
revisions of the 1010LT (I have one of these in a C7 machine at home, and I hand-built mudita24 for it, and it works well), as well as echomixer for all the Echo Audio stuff out there (I have an old first-gen 20-bit Layla on which I can test). And it's about time I
put
together that package of the dat-tools for using SGI-firmware-bearing Seagate DDS DAT drives for pulling audio off of DATs...... that's the only reason I keep my Purple Indigo2 IMPACT system running with IRIX
is
to use my SGI DAT drive with the IRIX audio software to pull audio
from
DATs. But that's in the future......
On the patent-encumbered codec front, for decoding MP3's the Fluendo codec is or was no-cost, and I think that codec should be the one pointed to if any. Nux has 'the rest.' But Johnny's exactly right about a SIG of CentOS and patent-encumbrance issues related to being under US copyright and patent laws.
I'm actually running Mixbus on one of my three screens right now as I type this for my weekly production tasks......
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On 19/02/16 09:14, Tim wrote:
Hey list,
it seems that at least two board members would support an audio production SIG.
What would be the next step?
You need to now get one of them to work with you on getting up the SIG Proposal, take it to the board - work through the questions and requests; then get the mechanics setup and you are off!
Ideally though - find a few more people who can help, a SIG run off the back of one person might not scale out too well.
regards,
Ok, seems like we have to wait now for more contributors/supporters.
Meanwhile I will build more packages. :-)
Regards Tim
Am 19. Februar 2016 18:29:41 MEZ, schrieb Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org:
On 19/02/16 09:14, Tim wrote:
Hey list,
it seems that at least two board members would support an audio production SIG.
What would be the next step?
You need to now get one of them to work with you on getting up the SIG Proposal, take it to the board - work through the questions and requests; then get the mechanics setup and you are off!
Ideally though - find a few more people who can help, a SIG run off the back of one person might not scale out too well.
regards,
Hi list,
I wanted to let you all know that I started a copr project at https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/tikro/centos-audio/
I'm still in a learning phase but some packages are built.
Regards Tim
Am 19. Februar 2016 18:29:41 MEZ, schrieb Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org:
On 19/02/16 09:14, Tim wrote:
Hey list,
it seems that at least two board members would support an audio production SIG.
What would be the next step?
You need to now get one of them to work with you on getting up the SIG Proposal, take it to the board - work through the questions and requests; then get the mechanics setup and you are off!
Ideally though - find a few more people who can help, a SIG run off the back of one person might not scale out too well.
regards,
On 02/22/2016 07:14 AM, Tim wrote:
Hi list,
I wanted to let you all know that I started a copr project at https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/tikro/centos-audio/
I'm still in a learning phase but some packages are built.
Regards Tim
Am 19. Februar 2016 18:29:41 MEZ, schrieb Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org:
On 19/02/16 09:14, Tim wrote:
Hey list,
it seems that at least two board members would support an audio production SIG.
What would be the next step?
You need to now get one of them to work with you on getting up the SIG Proposal, take it to the board - work through the questions and requests; then get the mechanics setup and you are off!
Ideally though - find a few more people who can help, a SIG run off the back of one person might not scale out too well.
I will be happy to be the CentOS Board member to sponsor this SIG.
What we need is a list of people who will contribute and want to join this SIG.
Once we have some people (at least 3 would be nice), we can do the things in the 'Setting up a new SIG' here:
https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup
I will be glad to bring this up at the next board meeting after we have 3 volunteers. Basically, we will maintain all the text sources (SOURCES and SPECS directory of exploded SRPM, minus binary files) in git.centos.org and build SRPMs from that content to a repo in https://cbs.centos.org/. We can even start the process early initially by using a github account to hlod the code and we can pull that into git.centos.org later.
@Tim - if you use freenode IRC. ping me there (hughesjr) and we can talk more about this.
Hey Johnny,
nice to read this! :-)
I will try to get in touch with you at the weekend.
Regards Tim
Am 24. Februar 2016 15:08:33 MEZ, schrieb Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org:
On 02/22/2016 07:14 AM, Tim wrote:
Hi list,
I wanted to let you all know that I started a copr project at
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/tikro/centos-audio/
I'm still in a learning phase but some packages are built.
Regards Tim
Am 19. Februar 2016 18:29:41 MEZ, schrieb Karanbir Singh
On 19/02/16 09:14, Tim wrote:
Hey list,
it seems that at least two board members would support an audio production SIG.
What would be the next step?
You need to now get one of them to work with you on getting up the
SIG
Proposal, take it to the board - work through the questions and requests; then get the mechanics setup and you are off!
Ideally though - find a few more people who can help, a SIG run off
the
back of one person might not scale out too well.
I will be happy to be the CentOS Board member to sponsor this SIG.
What we need is a list of people who will contribute and want to join this SIG.
Once we have some people (at least 3 would be nice), we can do the things in the 'Setting up a new SIG' here:
https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup
I will be glad to bring this up at the next board meeting after we have 3 volunteers. Basically, we will maintain all the text sources (SOURCES and SPECS directory of exploded SRPM, minus binary files) in git.centos.org and build SRPMs from that content to a repo in https://cbs.centos.org/. We can even start the process early initially by using a github account to hlod the code and we can pull that into git.centos.org later.
@Tim - if you use freenode IRC. ping me there (hughesjr) and we can talk more about this.
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On 02/24/2016 09:08 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
I will be happy to be the CentOS Board member to sponsor this SIG. What we need is a list of people who will contribute and want to join this SIG.
Johnny, Tim,
I'll volunteer to do some things in this SIG. My time is a bit constrained, but I do actively use CentOS 7 for professional audio tasks every week, so, of nothing else I can test things.
Sounds great!
Unfortunately I had not enough time to accelerate my ambitions to push the copr repository.
But I have had problems to compile ardour 4.6 or 4.7. Possibly someone can take a look at it? https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/tikro/epel7-daw-testing/builds/ I really can't find out why the builds failed.
Regards Tim
Am 16.03.2016 um 18:02 schrieb Lamar Owen:
On 02/24/2016 09:08 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
I will be happy to be the CentOS Board member to sponsor this SIG. What we need is a list of people who will contribute and want to join this SIG.
Johnny, Tim,
I'll volunteer to do some things in this SIG. My time is a bit constrained, but I do actively use CentOS 7 for professional audio tasks every week, so, of nothing else I can test things.
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On Fri, 2016-03-18 at 17:22 +0100, Tim wrote:
Sounds great!
Unfortunately I had not enough time to accelerate my ambitions to push the copr repository.
But I have had problems to compile ardour 4.6 or 4.7. Possibly someone can take a look at it? https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/tikro/epel7-daw-testing/builds/ I really can't find out why the builds failed.
Regards Tim
Am 16.03.2016 um 18:02 schrieb Lamar Owen:
On 02/24/2016 09:08 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
I will be happy to be the CentOS Board member to sponsor this SIG. What we need is a list of people who will contribute and want to join this SIG.
Johnny, Tim,
I'll volunteer to do some things in this SIG. My time is a bit constrained, but I do actively use CentOS 7 for professional audio tasks every week, so, of nothing else I can test things.
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
Hi,
You need to look at the requirements for this package. If I spin a build of that SRPM in mock I get:
Error: No Package found for aubio-devel >= 0.3.2 Error: No Package found for cwiid-devel >= 0.6.00 Error: No Package found for itstool >= 2.0.0 Error: No Package found for jack-audio-connection-kit-devel >= 1.9.10 Error: No Package found for libgnomecanvasmm26-devel >= 2.16 Error: No Package found for liblo-devel >= 0.24 Error: No Package found for liblrdf-devel >= 0.4.0 Error: No Package found for libltc-devel >= 1.1.1 Error: No Package found for lilv-devel >= 0.14.0 Error: No Package found for lv2-devel >= 1.0.0 Error: No Package found for rubberband-devel >= 1.0 Error: No Package found for serd-devel >= 0.14.0 Error: No Package found for sord-devel >= 0.8.0 Error: No Package found for sratom-devel >= 0.2.0 Error: No Package found for suil-devel >= 0.6.0
I have only checked the first, but aubio is neither in CentOS nor EPEL. Thus the failure.
Regards
Phil
Hey Phil,
that's why I have created a builddep-repo which is a dependency for the testing repo. Normally it should have all deps that are necessary.
Take a look at the build 162917: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/tikro/epel7-daw-testing/epel...
All dependencies were installed. hen you take a look at the build-log it seems there problems with glibmm24: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/tikro/epel7-daw-testing/epel...
But the build of glibmm24 has not failed and seems to be ok.
Any other ideas?
Thanks and regards Tim
Am 18.03.2016 um 18:25 schrieb Phil Wyett:
On Fri, 2016-03-18 at 17:22 +0100, Tim wrote:
Sounds great!
Unfortunately I had not enough time to accelerate my ambitions to push the copr repository.
But I have had problems to compile ardour 4.6 or 4.7. Possibly someone can take a look at it? https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/tikro/epel7-daw-testing/builds/ I really can't find out why the builds failed.
Regards Tim
Am 16.03.2016 um 18:02 schrieb Lamar Owen:
On 02/24/2016 09:08 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
I will be happy to be the CentOS Board member to sponsor this SIG. What we need is a list of people who will contribute and want to join this SIG.
Johnny, Tim,
I'll volunteer to do some things in this SIG. My time is a bit constrained, but I do actively use CentOS 7 for professional audio tasks every week, so, of nothing else I can test things.
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
Hi,
You need to look at the requirements for this package. If I spin a build of that SRPM in mock I get:
Error: No Package found for aubio-devel >= 0.3.2 Error: No Package found for cwiid-devel >= 0.6.00 Error: No Package found for itstool >= 2.0.0 Error: No Package found for jack-audio-connection-kit-devel >= 1.9.10 Error: No Package found for libgnomecanvasmm26-devel >= 2.16 Error: No Package found for liblo-devel >= 0.24 Error: No Package found for liblrdf-devel >= 0.4.0 Error: No Package found for libltc-devel >= 1.1.1 Error: No Package found for lilv-devel >= 0.14.0 Error: No Package found for lv2-devel >= 1.0.0 Error: No Package found for rubberband-devel >= 1.0 Error: No Package found for serd-devel >= 0.14.0 Error: No Package found for sord-devel >= 0.8.0 Error: No Package found for sratom-devel >= 0.2.0 Error: No Package found for suil-devel >= 0.6.0
I have only checked the first, but aubio is neither in CentOS nor EPEL. Thus the failure.
Regards
Phil
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
Hi,
Johnny had offered to get a SIG process going that there are multiple eople interested here. How is that getting on ?
Regards
On 18/03/16 18:20, Tim wrote:
Hey Phil,
that's why I have created a builddep-repo which is a dependency for the testing repo. Normally it should have all deps that are necessary.
Take a look at the build 162917: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/tikro/epel7-daw-testing/epel...
All dependencies were installed. hen you take a look at the build-log it seems there problems with glibmm24: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/tikro/epel7-daw-testing/epel...
But the build of glibmm24 has not failed and seems to be ok.
Any other ideas?
Thanks and regards Tim
Am 18.03.2016 um 18:25 schrieb Phil Wyett:
On Fri, 2016-03-18 at 17:22 +0100, Tim wrote:
Sounds great!
Unfortunately I had not enough time to accelerate my ambitions to push the copr repository.
But I have had problems to compile ardour 4.6 or 4.7. Possibly someone can take a look at it? https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/tikro/epel7-daw-testing/builds/ I really can't find out why the builds failed.
Regards Tim
Am 16.03.2016 um 18:02 schrieb Lamar Owen:
On 02/24/2016 09:08 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
I will be happy to be the CentOS Board member to sponsor this SIG. What we need is a list of people who will contribute and want to join this SIG.
Johnny, Tim,
I'll volunteer to do some things in this SIG. My time is a bit constrained, but I do actively use CentOS 7 for professional audio tasks every week, so, of nothing else I can test things.
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
Hi,
You need to look at the requirements for this package. If I spin a build of that SRPM in mock I get:
Error: No Package found for aubio-devel >= 0.3.2 Error: No Package found for cwiid-devel >= 0.6.00 Error: No Package found for itstool >= 2.0.0 Error: No Package found for jack-audio-connection-kit-devel >= 1.9.10 Error: No Package found for libgnomecanvasmm26-devel >= 2.16 Error: No Package found for liblo-devel >= 0.24 Error: No Package found for liblrdf-devel >= 0.4.0 Error: No Package found for libltc-devel >= 1.1.1 Error: No Package found for lilv-devel >= 0.14.0 Error: No Package found for lv2-devel >= 1.0.0 Error: No Package found for rubberband-devel >= 1.0 Error: No Package found for serd-devel >= 0.14.0 Error: No Package found for sord-devel >= 0.8.0 Error: No Package found for sratom-devel >= 0.2.0 Error: No Package found for suil-devel >= 0.6.0
I have only checked the first, but aubio is neither in CentOS nor EPEL. Thus the failure.
Regards
Phil
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On Fri, 2016-03-18 at 19:20 +0100, Tim wrote:
Hey Phil,
that's why I have created a builddep-repo which is a dependency for the testing repo. Normally it should have all deps that are necessary.
Take a look at the build 162917: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/tikro/epel7-daw-testing/epel...
All dependencies were installed. hen you take a look at the build-log it seems there problems with glibmm24: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/tikro/epel7-daw-testing/epel...
But the build of glibmm24 has not failed and seems to be ok.
Any other ideas?
Thanks and regards Tim
Hi,
Just looking at the dep repo you have at the moment and any issues arising from building those.
aubio has lash as a dep. However, the lash you have in your main repo, is the latest upstream tarball version, but is not the latest fedora revision. Some hackery in the spec to use new swig versions is the issue and really does not need to be.
In the lash package your using from an older fedora you will see:
sed -i 's|1.3.31|2.0.0|g' configure*
to use swig 2. The latest fedora packages have:
sed -i 's|1.3.31|3.0.0|g' configure*
in order to use swig 3. To make this hackery somewhat sane and clean up for rhel builds, we could maybe push a change request to the fedora maintainer. We can make the change to:
# Hacks to build against newer swig versions. %if 0%{?rhel} == 7 sed -i 's|1.3.31|2.0.0|g' configure* %endif
%if 0%{?fedora} >= 21 sed -i 's|1.3.31|3.0.0|g' configure* %endif
This allows the latest fedora lash revisions to build correctly on el7 (swig 2.0.10) and el6 (swig 1.3.40). Fedora will use swig 3 for all versions that do have swig 3. All fedora versions prior to 22 are just to note EOL now and I see no need to get cute and make those work.
Regards
Phil
On Fri, 2016-03-18 at 19:20 +0100, Tim wrote:
Hey Phil,
that's why I have created a builddep-repo which is a dependency for the testing repo. Normally it should have all deps that are necessary.
Take a look at the build 162917: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/tikro/epel7-daw-testing/epel...
All dependencies were installed. hen you take a look at the build-log it seems there problems with glibmm24: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/tikro/epel7-daw-testing/epel...
But the build of glibmm24 has not failed and seems to be ok.
Any other ideas?
Thanks and regards Tim
Hi,
Using mock I have successfully built ardour4. Most SRPMS were taken from your dep repo and built. Exceptions...
lash - Taken from fedora 24 with the addition of custom configure fix mentioned in another mail.
All other version exceptions come from fedora 24.
You can download the SRPMS from:
https://www.irregulars-engineering.com/centos/
Or pull same version from fedora directly.
One package that needs updating in EPEL is jack-audio-connection-kit. This will require a request to the EPEL package maintainer.
Are you hoping packages not currently in EPEL, be released via EPEL?
Regards
Phil
On 03/18/2016 01:20 PM, Tim wrote:
Hey Phil,
that's why I have created a builddep-repo which is a dependency for the testing repo. Normally it should have all deps that are necessary.
Take a look at the build 162917: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/tikro/epel7-daw-testing/epel...
All dependencies were installed. hen you take a look at the build-log it seems there problems with glibmm24: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/tikro/epel7-daw-testing/epel...
But the build of glibmm24 has not failed and seems to be ok.
Any other ideas?
Thanks and regards Tim
Let's get this started as a SIG if we have multiple users interested in commiting code and packages.
To start with we need a list of people willing to be in the SIG and we can have a meeting and discuss how the process works.
<snip>
Thanks, Johnny Hughes
On Mon, 2016-03-21 at 09:17 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 03/18/2016 01:20 PM, Tim wrote:
Hey Phil,
that's why I have created a builddep-repo which is a dependency for the testing repo. Normally it should have all deps that are necessary.
Take a look at the build 162917: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/tikro/epel7-daw-testing/epel...
All dependencies were installed. hen you take a look at the build-log it seems there problems with glibmm24: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/tikro/epel7-daw-testing/epel...
But the build of glibmm24 has not failed and seems to be ok.
Any other ideas?
Thanks and regards Tim
Let's get this started as a SIG if we have multiple users interested in commiting code and packages.
To start with we need a list of people willing to be in the SIG and we can have a meeting and discuss how the process works.
<snip>
Thanks, Johnny Hughes
Hi,
Please add me to the list.
Regards
Phil
Hi Johnny,
I'd like to be on the list too. :-)
Any suggestions for a meeting?
Regards Tim
Am 21. März 2016 15:17:43 MEZ, schrieb Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org:
On 03/18/2016 01:20 PM, Tim wrote:
Hey Phil,
that's why I have created a builddep-repo which is a dependency for
the
testing repo. Normally it should have all deps that are necessary.
Take a look at the build 162917:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/tikro/epel7-daw-testing/epel...
All dependencies were installed. hen you take a look at the build-log it seems there problems with
glibmm24:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/tikro/epel7-daw-testing/epel...
But the build of glibmm24 has not failed and seems to be ok.
Any other ideas?
Thanks and regards Tim
Let's get this started as a SIG if we have multiple users interested in commiting code and packages.
To start with we need a list of people willing to be in the SIG and we can have a meeting and discuss how the process works.
<snip>
Thanks, Johnny Hughes
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On Fri, 2016-03-18 at 19:20 +0100, Tim wrote:
Hey Phil,
that's why I have created a builddep-repo which is a dependency for the testing repo. Normally it should have all deps that are necessary.
Take a look at the build 162917: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/tikro/epel7-daw-testing/epel...
All dependencies were installed. hen you take a look at the build-log it seems there problems with glibmm24: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/tikro/epel7-daw-testing/epel...
But the build of glibmm24 has not failed and seems to be ok.
Any other ideas?
Thanks and regards Tim
Hi,
If you look at your build log, this is an issue of the EL7 trying to build using cxx11. This can be corrected in the spec file. I have reported the issue against 4.7.0 (rawhide) below and provided a patch that can be used to correct the current spec file for EL builds.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1319851
The lash issue I mentioned in a previous mail, now also has a bug report below with patch added.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1319848
For a complete list of packages required to build and run ardour4 on CentOS 7 - see:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/iephilwyett/centos-audio-sig/builds/
The above was just pre work based on Tims request for help. I will leave additional work until after SIG meeting takes place.
Regards
Phil
Hey Phil,
I also played around with the cxx-switch but it didn't work for me. But nice that it worked with you.
Great work and investigation! I will redo all your work for my better understanding.
Possibly we should work on a common copr repo to provide first packages and prepare packages for cbs later?
Regards Tim
Am 21. März 2016 21:38:49 MEZ, schrieb Phil Wyett philwyett@irregulars-engineering.com:
On Fri, 2016-03-18 at 19:20 +0100, Tim wrote:
Hey Phil,
that's why I have created a builddep-repo which is a dependency for
the
testing repo. Normally it should have all deps that are necessary.
Take a look at the build 162917:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/tikro/epel7-daw-testing/epel...
All dependencies were installed. hen you take a look at the build-log it seems there problems with
glibmm24:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/tikro/epel7-daw-testing/epel...
But the build of glibmm24 has not failed and seems to be ok.
Any other ideas?
Thanks and regards Tim
Hi,
If you look at your build log, this is an issue of the EL7 trying to build using cxx11. This can be corrected in the spec file. I have reported the issue against 4.7.0 (rawhide) below and provided a patch that can be used to correct the current spec file for EL builds.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1319851
The lash issue I mentioned in a previous mail, now also has a bug report below with patch added.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1319848
For a complete list of packages required to build and run ardour4 on CentOS 7 - see:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/iephilwyett/centos-audio-sig/builds/
The above was just pre work based on Tims request for help. I will leave additional work until after SIG meeting takes place.
Regards
Phil
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On Mon, 2016-03-21 at 23:15 +0100, Tim wrote:
Hey Phil,
I also played around with the cxx-switch but it didn't work for me. But nice that it worked with you.
Great work and investigation! I will redo all your work for my better understanding.
Possibly we should work on a common copr repo to provide first packages and prepare packages for cbs later?
Regards Tim
Hi Tim,
I am always available to collaborate on projects/SIGs. Let us wait until a SIG meeting takes place and we can then team up on one or more of the tasks.
Regards
Phil
It seems, that ardour4 only builds when all deps are in the same copr repo. An extra repo for deps as I did it seems not to work as expected. I don't know why but important to keep in mind.
Regards Tim
Am 22. März 2016 10:55:09 MEZ, schrieb Phil Wyett philwyett@irregulars-engineering.com:
On Mon, 2016-03-21 at 23:15 +0100, Tim wrote:
Hey Phil,
I also played around with the cxx-switch but it didn't work for me.
But nice that it worked with you.
Great work and investigation! I will redo all your work for my better
understanding.
Possibly we should work on a common copr repo to provide first
packages and prepare packages for cbs later?
Regards Tim
Hi Tim,
I am always available to collaborate on projects/SIGs. Let us wait until a SIG meeting takes place and we can then team up on one or more of the tasks.
Regards
Phil
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On Wed, 2016-03-23 at 17:07 +0100, Tim wrote:
It seems, that ardour4 only builds when all deps are in the same copr repo. An extra repo for deps as I did it seems not to work as expected. I don't know why but important to keep in mind.
Regards Tim
Hi Tim,
I don't see that issue. Same repo or external repo it will build fine.
I created a new centos-7-testing project on COPR.
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/iephilwyett/centos-7-testing/
On the 'Settings' tab I added the 'centos-audio-sig' repo (to satisfy deps)into the 'External Repositories:' box. i.e. adding:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/iephilwyett/centos-audio-sig...
In 'centos-7-testing', I have added and built ardour4.
Maybe you did not set things up correctly.
Regards
Phil
Hi Phil,
I used a copr:// URL. Possibly this is the problem? I will take a deeper look at it.
The root.log.gz seemed to resolve all dependencies fine.
Thank you Tim
Am 23. März 2016 18:21:16 MEZ, schrieb Phil Wyett philwyett@irregulars-engineering.com:
On Wed, 2016-03-23 at 17:07 +0100, Tim wrote:
It seems, that ardour4 only builds when all deps are in the same copr
repo. An extra repo for deps as I did it seems not to work as expected. I don't know why but important to keep in mind.
Regards Tim
Hi Tim,
I don't see that issue. Same repo or external repo it will build fine.
I created a new centos-7-testing project on COPR.
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/iephilwyett/centos-7-testing/
On the 'Settings' tab I added the 'centos-audio-sig' repo (to satisfy deps)into the 'External Repositories:' box. i.e. adding:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/iephilwyett/centos-audio-sig...
In 'centos-7-testing', I have added and built ardour4.
Maybe you did not set things up correctly.
Regards
Phil
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On 02/17/2016 03:42 PM, Tim wrote:
Hi all,
I would like to propose a new SIG for audio production.
This would primarily cover to setup a digital audio workstation. I started to build some packages for this like plugins, configurations and a realtime kernel (built from git.centos.org http://git.centos.org) for a public repository. During doing all this stuff I thought of founding a SIG.
I think, CentOS will be the right distribution for this, because it is really stable, reliable and long term supported.
Regards Tim
I think this is an outstanding idea and I support it.
One thing to keep in mind though is patents that require compensation. I think mp3's (for example) still fall into that category.
We can't approve things in the SIG that will violate IP law in the USA. And please let's not start a discussion on the validity of those laws. I don't know anyone who thinks they are great or wants them to exist .. but they do and we have that limitation.
But, outside of that limitation, I am 100% supportive of an Audio Production SIG.
Thanks, Johnny Hughes
Hey Johnny,
these are things that are definitely important. But I think high quality audio production will not need lossy codecs like mp3 and its proprietary licenses.
There is enough license-compatible high quality software out there. If someone needs something on top one must build it himself, i.e. when converting is a kind of need.
Regards Tim
Am 18. Februar 2016 15:31:21 MEZ, schrieb Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org:
On 02/17/2016 03:42 PM, Tim wrote:
Hi all,
I would like to propose a new SIG for audio production.
This would primarily cover to setup a digital audio workstation. I started to build some packages for this like plugins, configurations
and
a realtime kernel (built from git.centos.org http://git.centos.org) for a public repository. During doing all this stuff I thought of founding a SIG.
I think, CentOS will be the right distribution for this, because it
is
really stable, reliable and long term supported.
Regards Tim
I think this is an outstanding idea and I support it.
One thing to keep in mind though is patents that require compensation. I think mp3's (for example) still fall into that category.
We can't approve things in the SIG that will violate IP law in the USA. And please let's not start a discussion on the validity of those laws. I don't know anyone who thinks they are great or wants them to exist .. but they do and we have that limitation.
But, outside of that limitation, I am 100% supportive of an Audio Production SIG.
Thanks, Johnny Hughes
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
-
Fabian Arrotin -
Johnny Hughes -
Karanbir Singh -
Lamar Owen -
Peter Q. -
Phil Wyett -
Tim