Re: Is compiling for source the only way to still get Ardour 3 on Fedora 19?

[Sean Beeson <seanbeeson@xxxxxxxxx>]

OK, sorry. I neglected to install the boost-devel package. I have done that now and the /waf configure worked, so the actual compilation should as also work. It's about 1/4 of the way done. I will report back...

Sean

On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 12:19 AM, Sean Beeson <seanbeeson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Christopher,

On following the instructions I get...

[root@localhost 3.4]# ./waf configure

Setting top to                           : /opt/ardour/3.4 

Setting out to                           : /opt/ardour/3.4/build 

Checking for 'gcc' (c compiler)          : /usr/bin/gcc 

Checking for 'g++' (c++ compiler)        : /usr/bin/g++ 

Global Configuration 

 * Install prefix                                    : /usr/local 

 * Debuggable build                                  : True 

 * Build documentation                               : False 

Ardour Configuration 

 * Will build against private GTK dependency stack   : no 

 * Will rely on libintl built into libc              : yes 

 * Will build against private Ardour dependency stack : no 

Checking for boost library >= 1.39                   : too old

Please install boost version 1.39 or higher. 

The configuration failed

(complete log in /opt/ardour/3.4/build/config.log)

I have boost 1.53 installed, so I am not sure at this point what to try. I am building this on a F19 x86_64. 

Sean

On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 5:29 AM, Christopher R. Antila <crantila@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 09/11/2013 12:42 PM, Sean Beeson wrote:
> Is compiling for source the only way to still get Ardour 3 on Fedora 19?
>
> If so, does anyone have any good how to on dealing with the dependencies?

Hi Sean:

With little effort, I found these instructions for Ardour 3.1:
https://blogs.fsfe.org/samtuke/?p=548

Please let us know whether they still work.

However, I feel we should start a discussion on what to do about Ardour,
now that they have asked distributions not to package their software.
This is actually a serious ethical dilemma.

Possible Options Include:

1.) Package Ardour 3 against the developers' wishes, making no
additional changes.

2.) Package Ardour 3 against the developers' wishes, making some change
that encourages donating money to the project.

3.) Continue to package Ardour 2, accepting responsibility for
maintaining software that's abandoned by the upstream developers.

4.) Drop Ardour from the distribution, since we do not wish to maintain
the Ardour 2.8.x series or package the Ardour 3.x series against the
developers' wishes.

5.) ?

I favour the first or second options, since the free software audio
community is so small that we can't afford the added difficulty of using
such an important piece of software. On the other hand, the free
software audio community is so small that we can't afford creating a
rift with the Ardour developers. If we choose one of these options, we
should be sure to involve the developers in our decision-making process.

If the SIG wishes, I would be happy to research the state of Ardour in
other distributions.


Christopher
_______________________________________________
music mailing list
music@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/music

_______________________________________________
music mailing list
music@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/music