From: Robert J. <rob...@da...> - 2004-03-31 13:03:26
|
Hi, > > j4strngs@araka:~/Repository/muse$ ./configure && make > > Try this: > > http://lmuse.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/Cvs > > > .... > > > > >/usr/share/qt3/bin/uic -L ../../muse/widgets -o organguibase.h > > > > organguibase.ui > > uic: File generated with too recent version of Qt Designer (3.3 vs. > > 3.2.3) make[4]: *** [organguibase.h] Error 1 > > make[4]: Leaving directory `/home/j4strngs/Repository/muse/synti/organ' > > make[3]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 > > make[3]: Leaving directory `/home/j4strngs/Repository/muse/synti' > > make[2]: *** [all] Error 2 > > make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/j4strngs/Repository/muse/synti' > > make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 > > make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/j4strngs/Repository/muse' > > make: *** [all] Error 2 I "fixed" this one in cvs, (just changed the internal version number in the ui file). > > track.h:478: error: `find' undeclared in namespace `std' > > track.h: In member function `tracklist<T>::iterator > > tracklist<T>::find(const Track*) [with T = WaveTrack*]': Try adding #include <algorithms> to the includes and see if that changes anything. ( I see that Joachim mentions a similar problem in the wiki, seems probable that it will work. I'll check both in tonight unless someone tells me otherwise.) > > > > Nope........ Back to square one. > > It's now after 10pm. I started trying to build it around 4pm. I'm sorry if it takes a lot of your time, a good side effect is that I got of my back and tried to fix it ;). > > > > What's frustrating for me is I don't fire up MuSE to hack on it, I fire > > it up to sequence some accompaniment and then I end up looking to make > > fixes and my work doesn't get done. Yes, this is a feeling I get sometimes also, I have a good feeling about 0.7 though, and I think we are targetting for it to be a stable release. I actually did some testing yesterday, first with 0.6.3 and...well... I ran into a number of zombie bugs that I had thought I knew how to avoid... I might have to reevaluate my stand point that it's usable... It certainly wasn't yesterday... After that I went and imported all things into a fresh cvs compiled muse...and well...I didn't have any of those problems with the new version. There's a bunch of new ones but they where not as critical. > > > > -snip- > > > > > Some things are pretty broken right now (incomplete list follows) > > > - metronome > > > > Easy work around. Build a click track. Not a showstopper. Heh, quite right. (Actually, a good thing that you told me, I had been missing the metronome and it hadn't occured to me how easy it is to simulate, doh!) <...> > > > > > - automation architecture > > > > Not sure what you mean. Automation is an inherent property of being able > > to record MIDI. The primary function of a sequencer is MIDI > > record/playback. Automation outside the context of MIDI is beyond the > > scope of the basic mission of a sequencer. What I meant is automation for audio, or 'mixer automation' as I think it is called in the GUI. If I understand how it works (it's a bit blurry) it is supposed to be harmonized so you use the same technique to automate both midi and audio (I could be wrong about this though). > > > > > - lots of configuration changes > > > - more features in mixer > > > - interface changes, the TrackInfo pane is used more effectively now. > > > > I was going to take a pass at that. What's there in 6.3 is usable, even > > if it's clumsy. I also want to make the mastertrack list window editable. > > The mastertrack graphic window is IMO, inappropriate to the task.. Yes, the list should be editable. > > . > > > > > When the release is made that is finally called 0.7 it would be > > > terrible if it is not better than 0.6.3. (apart from the stuff that are > > > removed for good reason). > > > > These are all good things, but mostly secondary concerns. > > It has to do one thing beyond staying lit to be the killer app. Have > > stable timing. > > > > > Several of us are using MusE to create music, the new version should > > > enhance those possibilities, or else we have failed. > > > > > > /Robert > > > > Not sure what your point is, but I used to make music with 2 tape decks, > > one stereo, one mono, with scavenged bits of wire and connectors :-O. > > When MIDI became available I moved up to a hardware sequencer driving a > > keyboard and drum machine synced to a 4 track. Crude tools that work > > never stopped me. > > The first time I saw Voyetra running under DOS on a 386 I was floored. > > That program did everything a sequencer needs to do. All the other bells > > and whistles are just that. Yes, of course you can make music with a number of different methods. I've had my fair share of 4-track portables, and even standard cassette recorders. I can imagine people using all kinds of strange stuff to make music, but this is mainly a way of incorporating them in the creative process. For four-tracks it's not uncommon to make it part of the creation, the song will become what it is /because/ of the limitations and quirks of the media. It's the same with muse, because of limitations of the program you do things a certain way and thus influence the creative flow. In a specific case this could be exactly what you want. But in the generic case you really want the medium to be as non-intrusive as possible. Freeing the creative process. I do agree though, that this is secondary to having stability, and it might be that we've done things the wrong way at times (feature over function). But then again, MusE is still called 0.6 going for 0.7... in time it'll be one hell of an application. /Robert |