Re: [linux-audio-dev] plugin loaders

On Wed, 2006-12-20 at 15:43 -0800, Anthony Green wrote:
> I understand that LADSPA and friends specifically exclude any
> functionality around how to find and load plugins, but it seems that a
> lot can be gained by introducing some standards in this area.
>
> As a package of audio apps/plugins for a Linux distro, here are two of
> the problems I see:
>
> 1. Applications are often hard-coded to look in /usr/lib/ladspa (for
> instance), when many systems may require that libraries live somewhere
> else (like /usr/lib64/ladspa for x86-64, or /usr/lib32/ladspa for
> n32-ABI MIPS Linux). I've had to patch a lot of apps for x86-64 Fedora.

the "standard" specifies that LADSPA_PATH be used if set. thus, distros
that package LADSPA should set LADPSA_PATH in /etc/profile and its
various equivalents. i am still dismayed that distros (and even Intel)
could not agree on a common standard for the path to "the directory
where system-level 64 bit libraries are installed").

> 2. We build binaries for the lowest common denominator, so the plugins
> you'll find in Fedora, for instance, don't take advantage of SSE
> hardware or instruction scheduling for different processors. This can
> make a huge difference. What would be nice is if we could distribute an
> RPM containing a plurality of plugin builds, and then have the
> application load the plugin matching the capabilities the execution
> platform.

that's hard. but then again .... seems like its the job of a package
manager to identify the correct build to install on processor foo,
right?

--p
Received on Thu Dec 21 04:15:10 2006