[ANN] dssi-vst 0.5

[cannam]

dssi-vst 0.5 released!
======================

The 0.5 release of dssi-vst is now available.

dssi-vst is a DSSI plugin wrapper for Win32 VST effects and instruments
with GUI support, allowing them to be loaded into any DSSI host.

dssi-vst is available from the download page at

  http://dssi.sourceforge.net/

The 0.5 release now comes with Javier Serrano Polo's VST-compatibility
header, as previously distributed in LMMS.  (Actually, this header was
already compatible with dssi-vst -- no modifications to dssi-vst were
necessary -- it's just that the header is now included in the package.)  
This permits it to be compiled without the official VST SDK and
distributed under pure GPL.  No guarantees are made as to the
reliability of the results; your feedback is welcome, but please bear
in mind that I will not do any development work on the compatibility
header myself for legal reasons.

The 0.5 release is also (finally) compatible with version 2.4r2 of the
official SDK, should you wish to use it.


Chris
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@...
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user

[Ketil Thorgersen-2]

Great!

Dos this mean that dssi-vst can now be included in distributions such as
64studio, musix of ubuntustudio? - I mean from a legal point of view?

Best regards
Ketil
Chris Cannam skrev:

> dssi-vst 0.5 released!
> ======================
>
> The 0.5 release of dssi-vst is now available.
>
> dssi-vst is a DSSI plugin wrapper for Win32 VST effects and instruments
> with GUI support, allowing them to be loaded into any DSSI host.
>
> dssi-vst is available from the download page at
>
>   http://dssi.sourceforge.net/
>
> The 0.5 release now comes with Javier Serrano Polo's VST-compatibility
> header, as previously distributed in LMMS.  (Actually, this header was
> already compatible with dssi-vst -- no modifications to dssi-vst were
> necessary -- it's just that the header is now included in the package.)  
> This permits it to be compiled without the official VST SDK and
> distributed under pure GPL.  No guarantees are made as to the
> reliability of the results; your feedback is welcome, but please bear
> in mind that I will not do any development work on the compatibility
> header myself for legal reasons.
>
> The 0.5 release is also (finally) compatible with version 2.4r2 of the
> official SDK, should you wish to use it.
>
>
> Chris
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-audio-user mailing list
> Linux-audio-user@...
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
>
>  

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@...
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user

[cannam]

On Tuesday 11 December 2007 12:50, Ketil Thorgersen wrote:
> Dos this mean that dssi-vst can now be included in distributions such
> as 64studio, musix of ubuntustudio?

I think so.  dssi-vst was always redistributable; it just wasn't Free
Software in the Debian sense because it was under a modified version of
the GPL and not all source was available, so it would have to have
lived in a non-free repository or equivalent.  Whereas if you build the
new release with the compatibility header, then you get to distribute
it under the actual GPL.

As always of course you should consult your team of highly paid
top-flight lawyers rather than take my word for it.


Chris
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@...
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user

[dovidhalevi]

OK!

This one compiles, installs and now muse comes up, finds all those vsts! Get
all the UI trial warnings, registration failures, etc, etc, etc. (Some of
these free trials have indeed expired and stuff I paid for has its registry
info on windows registry, not wine's, so no complaints here.)

Rosegarden also comes up and does not crash out!
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@...
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user

[dovidhalevi]

On Tuesday 11 December 2007, Chris Cannam wrote:

> On Tuesday 11 December 2007 12:50, Ketil Thorgersen wrote:
> > Dos this mean that dssi-vst can now be included in distributions such
> > as 64studio, musix of ubuntustudio?
>
> I think so.  dssi-vst was always redistributable; it just wasn't Free
> Software in the Debian sense because it was under a modified version of
> the GPL and not all source was available, so it would have to have
> lived in a non-free repository or equivalent.  Whereas if you build the
> new release with the compatibility header, then you get to distribute
> it under the actual GPL.
>
> As always of course you should consult your team of highly paid
> top-flight lawyers rather than take my word for it.
>

If indeed this is legal, then maybe it can go up on the Debian repos as well!
All the other dssi stuff is there.
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@...
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user

[R Dicaire]

On Dec 11, 2007 6:05 AM, Chris Cannam <cannam@...> wrote:
>
> dssi-vst 0.5 released!
> ======================

I tried building this under Ubuntu Feisty, and got the following errors:

make
g++ -Ivestige -Wall remotepluginclient.cpp -c
/usr/include/pthread.h:285: error: conflicting declaration 'typedef
struct pthread_st* pthread_t'
/usr/include/bits/pthreadtypes.h:36: error: 'pthread_t' has a previous
declaration as 'typedef long unsigned int pthread_t'
/usr/include/pthread.h:286: error: conflicting declaration 'typedef
struct pthread_attr_st* pthread_attr_t'
/usr/include/bits/pthreadtypes.h:43: error: 'pthread_attr_t' has a
previous declaration as 'typedef union pthread_attr_t pthread_attr_t'
/usr/include/pthread.h:287: error: conflicting declaration 'typedef
int pthread_key_t'
/usr/include/bits/pthreadtypes.h:109: error: 'pthread_key_t' has a
previous declaration as 'typedef unsigned int pthread_key_t'
/usr/include/pthread.h:289: error: conflicting declaration 'typedef
int pthread_mutexattr_t'
/usr/include/bits/pthreadtypes.h:79: error: 'pthread_mutexattr_t' has
a previous declaration as 'typedef union pthread_mutexattr_t
pthread_mutexattr_t'
/usr/include/pthread.h:290: error: conflicting declaration 'typedef
struct pthread_mutex_st* pthread_mutex_t'
/usr/include/bits/pthreadtypes.h:73: error: 'pthread_mutex_t' has a
previous declaration as 'typedef union pthread_mutex_t
pthread_mutex_t'
/usr/include/pthread.h:291: error: conflicting declaration 'typedef
int pthread_condattr_t'
/usr/include/bits/pthreadtypes.h:105: error: 'pthread_condattr_t' has
a previous declaration as 'typedef union pthread_condattr_t
pthread_condattr_t'
/usr/include/pthread.h:292: error: conflicting declaration 'typedef
struct pthread_cond_st* pthread_cond_t'
/usr/include/bits/pthreadtypes.h:99: error: 'pthread_cond_t' has a
previous declaration as 'typedef union pthread_cond_t pthread_cond_t'
/usr/include/pthread.h:293: error: conflicting declaration 'typedef
int pthread_rwlockattr_t'
/usr/include/bits/pthreadtypes.h:142: error: 'pthread_rwlockattr_t'
has a previous declaration as 'typedef union pthread_rwlockattr_t
pthread_rwlockattr_t'
/usr/include/pthread.h:294: error: conflicting declaration 'typedef
struct pthread_rwlock_st* pthread_rwlock_t'
/usr/include/bits/pthreadtypes.h:136: error: 'pthread_rwlock_t' has a
previous declaration as 'typedef union pthread_rwlock_t
pthread_rwlock_t'
make: *** [remotepluginclient.o] Error 1


--
aRDy Music and Rick Dicaire present:
http://www.ardynet.com
http://www.ardynet.com:9000/ardymusic.ogg.m3u
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@...
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user

[James Stone-2]

On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 11:05:04AM +0000, Chris Cannam wrote:

>
> dssi-vst 0.5 released!
> ======================
>
> The 0.5 release of dssi-vst is now available.
>
> dssi-vst is a DSSI plugin wrapper for Win32 VST effects and instruments
> with GUI support, allowing them to be loaded into any DSSI host.
>
> dssi-vst is available from the download page at
>
>   http://dssi.sourceforge.net/
>

Builds fine on Debian Sid.

The tarball is misnamed as bz2. It is actually gz.

James
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@...
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user

[James Stone-2]

On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 11:05:04AM +0000, Chris Cannam wrote:

>
> dssi-vst 0.5 released!
> ======================
>
> The 0.5 release of dssi-vst is now available.
>
> dssi-vst is a DSSI plugin wrapper for Win32 VST effects and instruments
> with GUI support, allowing them to be loaded into any DSSI host.
>
> dssi-vst is available from the download page at
>
>   http://dssi.sourceforge.net/
>

Works very well. Will it ever be possible to load/save and select
presets?

James
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@...
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user

[gimpel]

cannam wrote:

dssi-vst 0.5 released!
======================

The 0.5 release of dssi-vst is now available.

dssi-vst is a DSSI plugin wrapper for Win32 VST effects and instruments
with GUI support, allowing them to be loaded into any DSSI host.

dssi-vst is available from the download page at

  http://dssi.sourceforge.net/

Hi!

Could you please rename the tarball on sourceforge to .gz or upload a real .bz2?
-----
$ file dssi-vst-0.5.tar.bz2
dssi-vst-0.5.tar.bz2: gzip compressed data
-----

Thanks! :)

[cannam]

On Wednesday 12 December 2007 15:10, gimpel wrote:
> Could you please rename the tarball on sourceforge to .gz or upload a real
> .bz2?

Several people have asked me this.  Apologies for the mistake; I've uploaded a
real .bz2 now, to replace the bz2 with a gz extension I originally uploaded.

While I'm grateful to have the error caught, I'm intrigued as to why so many
people thought this was important enough to write an email about -- why would
anyone really care?  Surely anyone prepared to build this from source is
capable of unpacking an archive that happens to have the wrong extension?  Am
I missing something?


Chris
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@...
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user

[Rui Nuno Capela]

On Wed, December 12, 2007 15:51, Chris Cannam wrote:

> On Wednesday 12 December 2007 15:10, gimpel wrote:
>
>> Could you please rename the tarball on sourceforge to .gz or upload a
>> real .bz2?
>>
>
> Several people have asked me this.  Apologies for the mistake; I've
> uploaded a real .bz2 now, to replace the bz2 with a gz extension I
> originally uploaded.
>
> While I'm grateful to have the error caught, I'm intrigued as to why so
> many people thought this was important enough to write an email about --
> why would anyone really care?  Surely anyone prepared to build this from
> source is capable of unpacking an archive that happens to have the wrong
> extension?  Am I missing something?
>

have you considered automated packaging into your equation? gentoo comes
to mind, but i'm not a gentooer :)

cheers
--
rncbc aka Rui Nuno Capela
rncbc@...
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@...
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user

[gimpel]

On Mi, 12.12.07 16:11 "Rui Nuno Capela" <rncbc@...> wrote:

>
> On Wed, December 12, 2007 15:51, Chris Cannam wrote:
> > On Wednesday 12 December 2007 15:10, gimpel wrote:
> >
> >> Could you please rename the tarball on sourceforge to .gz or
> >> upload a real .bz2?
> >>
> >
> > Several people have asked me this.  Apologies for the mistake; I've
> > uploaded a real .bz2 now, to replace the bz2 with a gz extension I
> > originally uploaded.
> >
> > While I'm grateful to have the error caught, I'm intrigued as to
> > why so many people thought this was important enough to write an
> > email about -- why would anyone really care?  Surely anyone
> > prepared to build this from source is capable of unpacking an
> > archive that happens to have the wrong extension?  Am I missing
> > something?
> >
>
> have you considered automated packaging into your equation? gentoo
> comes to mind, but i'm not a gentooer :)
>
> cheers

That's exactly why I asked for a new tarball.. I want to update the
Gentoo ebuild in our pro-audio overlay, and portage doesn't simply use
tar xvf, but bunzip2 && tar x

For sure affects other source based meta-distros too.

Thanks for the new tarball!

Regards,
Tom


_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@...
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user