Re: A common plugin repository (WAS:Re: [LAD] ladspa qa?)

On Thu, 2007-09-13 at 14:41 +0100, Steve Harris wrote:
> On 13 Sep 2007, at 14:28, elthariel wrote:
>
> >
> > 2007/9/13, Stefano D'Angelo <zanga.mail@email-addr-hidden>:
> > 2007/9/13, Benjamin Bruheim <grolgh@email-addr-hidden>:
> > > I am working on a site zzub.org which might feature binary
> > downloads
> > > of Ladspa plugins for windows, and on linux once it gets
> > into a
> > > fashionable state. But I would love to learn what
> > meta-data would be
> > > required for each binary version on the server so that a
> > client would
> > > be able to determine what version would work on your
> > OS/Distro.
> >
> > I'd say package format (.rpm, .deb, etc), OS distribution
> > (Ubuntu,
> > OpenSUSE, etc.), CPU architecture (ix86, x86_64, etc.) and
> > maybe
> > binary format (ELF, .dll, etc.). I guess a description
> > wouldn't hurt
> > too.
> > Personally, I'd like to see also some categorization stuff,
> > user
> > comments, votes, demos and so on.
> >
> > This is planned, i'm currently working on it.
> > I think the packaging problem should be handled by the library who
> > access the repository through a webservice. I think binary form,
> > event with its disavantadge is easier for the musician :/
>
>
> It's not quite that simple ofcourse - most plugins now consist of
> multiple files (at least a .so and .rdf), plus may have library
> dependencies. Not that this should stop you.

The easiest thing would probably be to have a library that calls some
sort of internet service that maps (plugin ID, platform) to a package
name, for example ("LADSPA:1198", "Debian/Etch/amd64") -> "swh-plugins".
Then the package swh-plugins can be installed, automatically if desired,
using the normal distribution tools (e.g. 'aptitude install swh-plugins'
in this case).

--ll

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-dev