[LAU] Jack, Ardour, and the Gentoo Pro-Audio Overlay

[hollunder at gmx.at]

On Fri, 17 Jul 2009 14:01:31 -0500 (CDT)
Brent Busby <brent at keycorner.org> wrote:

> On Fri, 17 Jul 2009, Tim Jones wrote:
> 
> > I've been settling into my own Gentoo system, and so far haven't
> > had any trouble with unmasked pro-audio packages (for numbered
> > versions anyway) interfering with anything else in portage. It
> > seems to me that pro-audio is not very well maintained. I've had to
> > hack several ebuilds to get them to work, but for the ones that do,
> > likely any masks are just because no one has tested the ebuild, or
> > because it is live.
> 
> Since the time I wrote earlier, I've had significant progress getting 
> things installed, mostly from avoiding the live CVS versions of 
> everything, and settling for Jack 0.116.2, which is still 0.116 or
> newer as cautioned on the Ardour site.  (I compiled with no DBus or
> firewire support, since I don't use Ffado or FreeBob.)  Everything
> now seems to coexist well with my other apps and system libraries.
> I've got Ardour 2.7.1.
> 
> My next challenge is to pick a version of rt-sources and get that 
> configured and setup.  I usually prefer to setup a kernel with
> modules that my current system has or is likely to ever have, and put
> the ones that are needed to boot into the kernel statically, so I'm
> going to see if I can do without an initrd.  That certainly out to be
> possible though.  I just don't like having ninety drivers I don't use
> autoloaded by 'discover' during the bootup...it's annoying.
> 
> I wonder if it's better to go with the unmasked rt-sources-2.6.16-r29 
> (which I see has a very high patchlevel number, so apparently a lot
> of time is going into it), or the newest rt-sources-2.6.29.2-r11,
> which is more current, but masked.  I asked this recently on the
> Pro-Audio overlay list, so I'll see what they say there.
> 
> > But more people care about jack and Ardour so you're likely to find 
> > more support on those. Anyway, I would say don't be afraid of the 
> > masked packages.
> 
> Yeah, I've seen so many packages in Pro-Audio that needed unmasking
> to install that I've just started treating that as par for the course
> in the overlay.  I'm still sticking with stable packages for my base
> system though.
> 
> > I generally haven't built any dbus support, and I'm not sure how
> > jack itself uses dbus. Not sure about "classic" either, but for
> > those undocumented flags, I find the best thing to do is just open
> > the ebuild and see what options those flags are passing to
> > configure (which you should be able to figure out without any
> > knowledge of how ebuilds work) and then see what those do.
> 
> I did finally find a websvn interface to the changelogs on the
> overlay site that described that:  It's for if you'd like to compile
> both Dbus *and* non-Dbus Jack -- you can enable "dbus" and "classic"
> together. I've just gone with 0.116.2 and no Dbus, and that seems to
> coexist with everything else nicely.

You can, but it's not a very good idea, read up on it in: [LAD]
jackd/jackdbus : D-Bus or not D-Bus...