Created attachment 343 [details] the patch being held here's the patch. I updated the al*h files to the latest ones from openal-soft (pre-release of openal-1.14). Mostly minor changes, although without this the al-efx.h file wouldn't load. I still can't get the test to run - well it runs but it only runs against the system openal library (despite using ld-library-path), so it doesn't find the extension. I think the extension name might have changed compared to a small test programme I wrote separately which I know worked, so I changed that to what I think the new one is. I had to fix some joal code which doesn't run against the current gluegen (Debug.java). afaict it's against sven's git revision: bb177035f42c650f1f66ed172efc65c34b180c31
Created attachment 344 [details] version with correct extension name in test sorry, previous one didn't have the changed extension name in the test. it of course, still doesn't find the extension.
I am reading your patch now - sorry a bit late. Looks great, even a unit test. thank you! If you can clarify #1 I can merge the code. #2 would be nice to know. +++ #1 You removed the (c) of the header files, how can you do this ? Do you use a non (c) source for your changes ? What is the source of your headers ? +++ #2 ALproc -> (void *) Isn't it more declarative to have ALproc or did the 'official' header changes ? +++
(In reply to comment #2) > I am reading your patch now - sorry a bit late. > Looks great, even a unit test. thank you! > > If you can clarify #1 I can merge the code. > #2 would be nice to know. > > +++ > > #1 > > You removed the (c) of the header files, how can you do this ? > Do you use a non (c) source for your changes ? > What is the source of your headers ? > > +++ > #2 > > ALproc -> (void *) > Isn't it more declarative to have ALproc or did the 'official' header changes > ? > > +++ A: #1 & #2 It looks to me that notzed have based the headers from OpenAL-Soft The headers of OpenAL-soft do not contain a copyright in the headers of the inludes: Original OpenAL headers are: /joal/make/stub_includes/openal/ al.c alc.h alext.h al.h alut.h eax.h efx.h OpenAL-Soft headers are: /openal-soft/include/AL/ alc.h alext.h al.h efx-creative.h efx.h efx-presets.h Note that some headers found in the original OpenAL headers are missing in OpenAL-soft compared to the original OpenAL headers expecially: * EAX eax.h (support for the creative only hardware specific extensions) possibly replaced by efx-creative.h in OpenAL-soft * al.c There is two new files added by notzed patch that have no explanation and no header: alc-types.h al-types.h So to resolve this situation i suggest the following: Fist we should switch the headers used by JOAL to the unmodified headers from OpenAL-soft with included EFX support. Then we merge the changes that only alters JOAL files only from notzed patch. And finally fix any incompatibility by using the new OpenAL-soft headers.
A: #1 & #2 This post verify the assumption that notzed used and added some modifications to the OpenAL-soft headers http://forum.jogamp.org/openal-extensions-patch-td3835494.html "Oh, and I forgot to mention in the bug: don't ask me what is up with the copyright jumping around in the openal-soft headers, I just thought it best to change them as little as possible and that's how they came this time."
(In reply to comment #3) > (In reply to comment #2) > There is two new files added by notzed patch that have no explanation and no > header: > alc-types.h > al-types.h These two headers looks like they are a replacement for including the system /usr/include/linux/stddef.h and possibly /usr/include/inttypes.h I will try alter the JOAL gluegen to use the system headers
(In reply to comment #3) > So to resolve this situation i suggest the following: > Fist we should switch the headers used by JOAL to the unmodified headers from > OpenAL-soft with included EFX support. Then we merge the changes that only > alters JOAL files only from notzed patch. And finally fix any incompatibility > by using the new OpenAL-soft headers. I have started a, work in progress, EFX branch to implement the merge outlined in the suggestion above: https://github.com/xranby/joal/tree/EFX
The patch have been merged. https://github.com/sgothel/joal/pull/8 JOAL is now able to run the testAlCLoopbackDeviceSOFT(com.jogamp.openal.test.junit.ALExtLoopbackDeviceSOFTTest) junit test an is able to find and use the OpenAL-soft loopback extension. The written buffer generated by using the loopback extension is not bit identical to the original buffer. This is kind of expected, we need to polish the junit test a little more. But all in all OpenAL extensions work after the merge! (11:30:41) sgothel: There was 1 failure: (11:30:41) sgothel: 1) testAlCLoopbackDeviceSOFT(com.jogamp.openal.test.junit.ALExtLoopbackDeviceSOFTTest) (11:30:42) sgothel: java.lang.AssertionError: expected:<127> but was:<-128> (11:30:44) sgothel: at com.jogamp.openal.test.junit.ALExtLoopbackDeviceSOFTTest.testAlCLoopbackDeviceSOFT(ALExtLoopbackDeviceSOFTTest.java:102)
We bundle OpenAL-Soft and build for Linux, Android and OSX. Note: - Windows is still in progress. - On OSX we prefer the system OpenAL, since OpenAL-Soft provides no output devices here.