<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 3:27 AM, Paul Davis <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:paul@linuxaudiosystems.com">paul@linuxaudiosystems.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Danni Coy <<a href="mailto:danni.coy@gmail.com">danni.coy@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> It would be really nice if gstreamer and pulse-audio played better with<br>
> jack.<br>
<br>
</div>what's your issue with gstreamer support for JACK? i use it all day, every day.<br>
</blockquote></div><br>To be honest I hadn't tried for several reasons <br>1) Ubuntu makes running anything with jack a LOT harder than it needs to be. I would need to compile jack support in myself (my understanding is that this policy will change for 10.04 and it better - even Debian unstable is a lot easier to set up for pro-audio at the moment)<br>
2) the jack plugin is resides in gstreamer-plugins-bad package and the last I heard about the gstreamer devs about it was that the code did need a lot of extra love.<br>3) While I like the idea of gstreamer I have found libxine generally does the job with fewer resourses and fewer problems. The amarok devs who used to develop backends for both seem to hold the same opinion (and the phonon devs give a similar reccomendation) . As such I have tended to overlook gstreamer based programs and go for the alternatives, since I run KDE all the default choices are non gstreamer anyway. <br>
<br>Having said all that. Hearing reports that gstreamer do now play fine with jack is just what I wanted to hear. It means that I can start exploring the gstreamer universe and see what it really has to offer :)<br>