[linux-audio-dev] LADSPA Issues

Dave Robillard drobilla at connect.carleton.ca
Wed May 18 08:56:16 UTC 2005

Hi all,

A while ago I started a thread about the proper way to refer to LADSPA
plugins (in save files or whatever) and the consensus was library
filename + label.

People have been having problems with library name - different packages
seem to make different names for the libraries (prefixing blop_, for
example) so it doesn't always work.  Basically I think using shared
library file name is an awful way to reference plugins for numerous

So why wasn't the unique ID the thing to use?  There is a unique plugin
ID in LADSPA, if not for this then for what reason?

In a similar vein, I really think the current system for LADSPA
distribution sucks - big tarballs from various devs containing heaps of
completely unrelated plugins.  A centralized site where plugins can be
submitted on their own (or in related groups) would be a great thing,
IMO, and would make it easy to verify that unique IDs are in fact unique
to solve the above problem.

Right now if a developer wants to make just one random plugin, they
don't really have a sane way of getting it out there.  I'm willing to
full-time maintain the site, but I don't really have the
hosting/abilities to create it.  What do the other plugin authors think
about this?  Is there a web nerd around with the
time/hosting/inclination to build the site?  It doesn't need to be
fancy, just functional.



More information about the Linux-audio-dev mailing list