4 Nov
2006
4 Nov
'06
2:25 a.m.
Would it be possible to compile the headers for the VST separately, and
then link them as a external library? Audacity does this with LAME. It
can use the library, but you just have to download a separate binary.
It's not the best solution from a software libre standpoint, but might
avoid the issues of licensing.
4 Nov
4 Nov
7:20 a.m.
New subject: VST licensing progress
Would it be possible to compile the headers for the
VST separately, and
then link them as a external library? Audacity does this with LAME. It
can use the library, but you just have to download a separate binary.
It's not the best solution from a software libre standpoint, but might
avoid the issues of licensing.
Interesting...
AFAIK, this would still require each end-user to deal with downloading SDK
from Steinberg before compiling the lib. So, yes, it would make it easier
when dealing with multiple VST-dependent apps, but it would still not
alleviate the overhead like the arrangement we are currently hoping for. In
addition, it would prevent distributions from pre-packaging the lib making
the out-of-box experience likely less "polished" (although granted, we could
shrink-wrap the entire process via some kind of an user-friendly
post-install process). Perhaps this could be our plan "C"?
Anyone else care to comment?
Ico
3:43 p.m.
New subject: VST licensing progress
On Saturday 04 Nov 2006 00:25, Ashton Snelgrove wrote:
Would it be possible to compile the headers for the
VST separately,
and then link them as a external library?
That's broadly what we do now with dssi-vst. (dssi-vst also runs the
plugin in a separate process instead of within the same library, but it
does that for technical reasons, not legal ones. It could usefully be
updated to use the same method as xfst, running the VST directly from
within the DSSI plugin library, with no additional legal problems.)
There are limitations with dssi-vst that are due to the "impedance
mismatch" between the DSSI and VST APIs. Fixing that, by designing
your library API specifically to resemble VST, might get you back in to
an interestingly ambiguous legal area.
So there are various possible technical hacks, but yes, it would be
better not to have to use (more of) them. Apart from anything else, it
would be nice to feel there was no impediment to doing things like
using the VST logo when promoting one's software.
Chris
6383
days inactive
6383
days old
consortium@lists.linuxaudio.org
2 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Ashton Snelgrove -
Chris Cannam -
Ivica Ico Bukvic