[Jack-Devel] stepping down
paul at linuxaudiosystems.com
Sun Jan 31 21:59:34 CET 2016
On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 3:48 PM, Kjetil Matheussen <k.s.matheussen at gmail.com
> On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 2:44 PM, Paul Davis <paul at linuxaudiosystems.com>
>> On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 6:33 AM, Kjetil Matheussen <
>> k.s.matheussen at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I don't think Jack is the wrong solution for a DAW either. But Jack
>>> never got finished.
>>> It has a wonderful API, but it shouldn't be a struggle for a program to
>>> create a jack client
>>> if a jack server isn't running. (there were a lot of talk about this
>>> around 10 years ago,
>>> but the end result never became as good as it should I think).
>> i am not sure what the problem is here. if the client doesn't specify
>> anything, then the server will start automatically with the same parameters
>> as it did last time. this has worked for years. no?
> Well, I've never used it. It doesn't feel safe. There is no obvious place
> check that it does what it's supposed to.
You're sure of that? Every one of your JACK clients explicitly avoids
The mechanism for this is extremely simple and robust. The contents of the
file ~/.jackdrc are executed. You can check the result with ps aux or a
>>> I think the first program trying to create a client also should start
>>> the server. Not
>>> just fork off a process, but actually run the server.
>>> And if another program wants to create a jack client, it connects to the
>>> first client process,
>>> which is the one running the server.
>> this seems a bit odd to me. if the first client is really just a client,
>> why would it become the server?
> If only one program produces sound, why would you also want to start a
i can think of lots of reasons. but i don't think it matters.
> , plus that it
> would provide an enormous number of fun and interesting programming
> for the implementors of that functionality.
and no effective difference for users over and above the current auto-start
you also missed out how EVERY single possible JACK client now has to have
some way to bring up a server control dialog, that will work no matter what
GUI toolkit the client was written with (or no GUI toolkit).
is this supposed to be a serious suggestion?
> But my point is that you don't need the jackd program. Every client is
> also a potential
> server (although the user doesn't know this), and since libjack provides
> functionalities for
> configuring jack the same way for all clients, jackd is not needed. This
> way we can also
> create formally specified error messages for the clients. Currently, if
> something goes
> wrong, you have to dig around in the "messages" window in qjackctl, which
> may contain
> some information that could help you make things work. It's really bad
a pathway for errors to propagate from server to clients was something
discussed in berlin in 2007.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Jackaudio