[Jack-Devel] libjack vs server [ was Re: stepping down

[Patrick Shirkey]

On Mon, February 1, 2016 7:39 pm, Kjetil Matheussen wrote:
>
>>
>> I am fairly confident that what is better for most users is having a
>> well
>> known point of control (e.g. cadence, qjackctl) to start and control
>> JACK,
>>
>
> And that's what I'm suggesting. One well known point of control, provided
> by libjack, which every
> client can use, if they want.
>

It's an interesting line of thought.

What happens if the original app that was used to start the jack process
is taken out either by force or error?

The rest of the group needs to have a mechanism for keeping running.

A server solves this problem by keeping jack as a seperate process that is
not dependant on any other process to keep it alive.

Can you expand on how you would solve this with library instead of a server?



--
Patrick Shirkey
Boost Hardware Ltd