[Fedora-music-list] Is compiling for source the only way to still get Ardour 3 on Fedora 19?

[Fernando Lopez-Lezcano]

On 09/12/2013 05:23 AM, Brendan Jones wrote:
> On 09/12/2013 12:09 PM, Ian Malone 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.
>>> >
>> Have they actually done this? I can't see any mention on the site and
>> the only thing in the source appears to be "PACKAGER_README" which has
>> a note about naming the package if built with VST support and the
>> templates directory. If anything that note suggests they're still okay
>> with packaging.
>
> Paul Davis regularly states that he won't respond to bug reports filed
> against Ardour when its been installed via a distribution or 3rd party
> repo ([1] for example).

He's had to deal with many problems in the past from bad packaging or 
problems with the native libraries in the distributions (I don't think 
he has had any with Fedora - or so I hope).

> There is no longer any direct link to the source - you must login, go
> past the option to donate etc, however, this is the case for Ardour 2 as
> well.

(sorry for the delay in answering this...)

I do get it regularly from git... nothing to do other than clone it, no 
barriers to do that.

I maintain an internal build for CCRMA and I have a spec file I have 
been using. Let me know if you want it... You also need to package 
harvid for the video timeline stuff to work (I also have a spec file for 
it).

-- Fernando



> I'd like the Ardour maintainers to weigh in - I think we should package
> it anyway. It is open source after all. However, it will require a new
> review request ( we should package both 2 and 3 in parallel, but only 3
> on the spin, assuming its ready in time).
>
> I remember Fernando saying he has a .spec file available on request.
> Volunteers anyone?
>
> regards,
>
> Brendan.
> [1]
> http://lists.ardour.org/pipermail/ardour-users-ardour.org/2013-August/012918.html