[LAD] [Jack-Devel] distros migrating to JACK2?
ralf.mardorf at alice-dsl.net
Fri Apr 16 21:14:29 UTC 2010
Adrian Knoth wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 09:55:56PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>>>>> First, we can't have virtual packages for shared libraries in Debian, so
>>>>> we cannot provide two different versions of libjack.
>>>> i don't understand this. either i'm not understanding the point, or it
>>>> sounds likea debian-specific limitation. i use fedora+ccrma, which has
>>> It's debian-specific.
>> No, I'm using a Debian and Ubuntu, were it's easy to build dummy
> Feel free to enlighten me how to provide both, jackd1 and jackd2 in
> I'm happy to please both camps, if possible.
Not both at the same time and of course I do have an outdated Debian
install, but I guess Ubuntu is equivalent to Debian. Am I mistaken?
And as I've written before, you need dummy packages or the other dirty
solution is to keep the packages, but to delete their files and to
over-install a self-build version.
>> JACK2 doesn't disconnect clients. The disadvantage: There might be
>> phasing between the left and the right channel. The advantage: Even if
> Could you elaborate on this? I don't understand it.
Yes. On my machine JACK1 did and maybe does disconnect clients, thus I'm
running JACK2. Even if I don't have any messages by JACK2, e.g. xruns,
there are troubles regarding to the quality of the sound, e.g. sometimes
the left and right channel aren't in sync.
I don't need any measurement, I'm able to hear this, but of course I did
verify it by using a "Phasenkorellator", what ever it's called on
English. I solved this by using high latency.
I'm tired of discussing that. Believe me or don't believe it.
>> There's only one good solution. Every user must have the choice between
>> JACK1 and JACK2.
Ok, I just read the first paragraphs. It's unimportant to me. I'm a
musician, I'm an audio engineer, I'm a user.
I'm free to use my favourite distro, I'm free not to use Linux ... I
Just like to report that there are some very experienced audio engineers
who don't have the time to care about this issues. I do have the time :).
Do what ever you like to do, think what ever you like to think and maybe
the day will come, you'll climb down the ivory tower and meet some
"accepted" audio engineers.
Don't care about my opinion, just care about those people who were
comfortable using JACK1 and who now are informed that for the future
they have to deal with issues because their distro will ship with JACK2
and that there is no comfortable way to keep JACK1.
IMO this can't be the right way. What ever the reason is to use JACK1 or
JACK2, some people might be neurotic and because of that they just can't
stand the index 1 or 2 ... What is the reason not to have a package for
JACK1 and another for JACK2? What is the reason to separate jackd from
At the moment I do have a free jazz phase of life, I don't care much
about computers for music anyway. I'm sure there will be the time I like
to do sequencer based pop music again, if so I anyway won't care much
about JACK audio, but because of ALSA MIDI jitter.
However that be, Linux audio IMO is completely independent from any rule
because of Linux package management that makes sense for apps for the
averaged Linux user. Nobody but audio folks do need JACK. Whatever I do
report about any version of JACK is irrelevant, the only important issue
at the moment is to think about making JACK1 and 2 available for every user.
I'm sorry if I did miss the thread because of some notes. Be sure, we'll
have the chance to regard those issues for another thread at another time.
Perhaps we could write off-list on German regarding to some OT issues
... after the weekend ;).
For me it's good news that distros do ship with JACK2 in the future! But
I do sympathize with the people who like to use JACK1 and eventually the
day will come distros decide to ship with JACK1 again. Users just can't
relay to keep a stable system for their needs, while they stay at and
upgrade their favourite distro.
This is bad.
More information about the Linux-audio-dev