[CM] question on audio distributions, CCRMA or Agnula, others?

Fernando Lopez-Lezcano nando@ccrma.Stanford.EDU
02 Mar 2005 12:45:40 -0800

On Wed, 2005-03-02 at 12:27, Rick Taube wrote:
> yes the main point i wanted to make was that loading seperate pacakges 
> at runtime is better than shipping images in installs because then each 
> package can be upgraded on its own as the user wishes but still work 
> together.

Sorry I misunderstood. Yes, of course we agree on that. 

> thats what the planet ccrma packaging does as described. 
> fwiw, if you start cm and it doesnt have write permission for a fasl it 
> thinks it should update it will simply load the source file. 

> I think most lisps now compile everything anyway.

Hmmm, I don't understand what you are trying to say in this last part. 
-- Fernando

> >> there are no dependencies. since the last release of cm you can build
> >> all the systems separately then load what you want at run time. for
> >> example, depending on what im doing these days i start cm and then 
> >> load
> >> in either clm2 or clm3. if midishare is properly installed it is
> >> automatically loaded.
> >> loading these systems at runtime is fast, flexible and lets you stay
> >> current -- saving images doesnt make much sense anymore unless your
> >> goal is to keep a snapshot "stable" (whatever that means with software
> >> like this!)  all three -- clm, cmn and cm -- check at runtime to see 
> >> if
> >> their fasls are out of data, and if so, they get compiled so
> >> installation and running is identical.
> >
> > That is true for a user that installs in his/her/its home directory (or
> > somewhere else where he has write access) and has complete control of
> > the software.