Package Details: juce 5.4.3-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/juce.git (read-only)
Package Base: juce
Description: Cross-platform C++ framework, including the Projucer C++ editor
Upstream URL: https://www.juce.com/
Licenses: custom
Submitter: imrehg
Maintainer: imrehg
Last Packager: imrehg
Votes: 10
Popularity: 0.339990
First Submitted: 2017-04-22 11:06
Last Updated: 2019-04-20 18:22

Dependencies (14)

Required by (2)

Sources (3)

Latest Comments

1 2 3 Next › Last »

RedTide commented on 2019-07-12 06:38

Same issue here as Super8 and johnbotris. For those who face this issue related to GCC v9, it's reported also here: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=925723

johnbotris commented on 2019-06-30 05:21

I'm getting the same issue as Super8, here is the output from the makefile. Out of curiosity, I appended -Wno-address-of-packed-member to JUCE_CFLAGS and JUCE_CXXFLAGS in src/JUCE-5.4.3/extras/Projucer/Builds/LinuxMakefile/Makefile, but, probably unsurprisingly, this didn't fix it. Can anyone help?

EDIT: Ok, I worked around this by compiling with clang++ instead of gcc. It seems that the JUCE team does some stuff with referencing fields of packed structs in unions that gcc doesn't allow, but most other compilers do. I think to actually fix this it would require a fix in the code.

I'm not sure if this would have compiled with some version of gcc < 9.1.

Super8 commented on 2019-06-18 19:24

Hello! I can't build Juce. I get complaints about juce::PixelRGB int pointer alignment, Is this a problem on my system? Should I send te full text of the error prompt?

mzuther commented on 2018-05-27 20:44

@Gimmeapil: In AppConfig.h, there is a "SECTION A" where you can disable user tracking (JUCE_REPORT_APP_USAGE). Section A is preceded by the following statement:

In accordance with the terms of the JUCE 5 End-Use License Agreement, the JUCE Code in SECTION A cannot be removed, changed or otherwise rendered ineffective unless you [...] are using JUCE under the GPL v3 license.

There is also a matching option in ProJucer to remove user tracking. Additionally, you can remove user tracking from ProJucer itself by changing the define JUCER_ENABLE_GPL_MODE to 1 (which is again in section A). ProJucer even points you to this define as an alternative to logging into a ROLI account.

So anybody who checks the default application settings will not end up with an application that tracks users. That's fair enough, don't you think?

Martin

Gimmeapill commented on 2018-05-18 10:18

@imrehg: Thanks for the feedback.

I re-read that analytics announcement and actually you're right: it should be rather up to the application developers to inform their users - not the library packager.

This being said, if I understood correctly, upstream also enabled some tracking in the IDE itself?

If that's the case, a note to developers would probably be warranted then (in case they missed the license, splashscreen and watermarking...).

imrehg commented on 2018-05-02 10:39

Gimmeapil: that part is in the README that is installed as the relevant LICENSE file by the package, I don't think that a special shoutout about that part is really suitable, while ignoring the other parts of the License (e.g. the usage limits of the license), which are relevant for people's choices. And echoing out the whole license in a pre_install is an option, but doesn't feel a proper solution...

IMHO people need to check and review licenses when they install. Also, that license is the same since 2017 April (from Juce 5) https://github.com/WeAreROLI/JUCE/commits/master/README.md so it is likely not new.

Will keep thinking what would be a good response to this question. In the meantime, review licenses, just as you did.

Gimmeapill commented on 2018-05-02 09:40

Gents, are you aware of the user tracking in the free version introduced around 5.2?

https://forum.juce.com/t/announcing-a-new-analytics-module/24764

The readme clearly mentions it:

https://github.com/WeAreROLI/JUCE

"You agree to give notice to the end-users of your Applications that we may track the IP addresses associated with their use of the Applications using JUCE solely for our internal purposes in providing JUCE, unless you are a paying JUCE customer and opt-out of such tracking."

However, this would probably deserve a word of warning from the packager, no?

SpotlightKid commented on 2018-03-23 03:23

A maybe stupid question: why aren't you using the JUCE distribution archives from https://github.com/WeAreROLI/JUCE/releases ?

These are versioned, gzipped tarballs and contain no binaries, therefor are a lot smaller.

ech commented on 2018-03-22 18:15

Hey! It seems you need to update checksums — there were a new release recently.

milk commented on 2018-02-25 02:52

==> ERROR: One or more files did not pass the validity check!