[LAD] distros migrating to JACK2?

Adrian Knoth adi at drcomp.erfurt.thur.de
Fri Apr 16 14:15:37 UTC 2010

On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 11:32:16AM +0200, Philipp wrote:

> > Also note that there's no (easy) way back, we're entirely switching to
> > jackd2, that is, the user won't have the possibility to select jackd1
> > instead.
> May I ask for the reasoning behind this?

There are many reasons, some technical, some organizational, some

First, we can't have virtual packages for shared libraries in Debian, so
we cannot provide two different versions of libjack.

Second, we don't want application A require jack1 and application B
jackd2, so you can't run both applications. As this would be the case if
you have different jackd versions with different feature sets, we
entirely counter this by only packaging one version.

This is also beneficial wrt supporting. We don't want different problems
with different versions, we don't want writing patches twice, once for
jackd1 and a second time for jackd2.

Foremost, we don't want users to stumble because they're using "the
wrong" version. To us, jackd has nothing to do with choice, it's simply
an inter-application framework for routing audio/midi data, and no user
should ever need to care about this. (Do you care about libreadline? It
simply has to be there)

That said, we expect upstream to provide at least one feature-complete
jackd implementation. This means DBUS support (pulseaudio integration),
jack-session support, ladish support or whatever the feature should be,
e.g. SMP.

Since jack-session is rather new and the decision was made prior to
this, since CCRMA and Gentoo's pro-audio overlay all use jackd2, we
chose jackd2 to be this feature-complete jackd implementation.

If you want jack-session to fly, you need to have it in jackd2. It's
that simple. ;) 

Consider this as a chance to avoid even more divergence among jackd


mail: adi at thur.de  	http://adi.thur.de	PGP/GPG: key via keyserver

More information about the Linux-audio-dev mailing list