[LAU] Connect pipewire to running JACK server

Fernando Lopez-Lezcano nando at ccrma.Stanford.EDU
Wed Jan 26 19:08:15 CET 2022


On 1/26/22 6:29 AM, Paul Davis wrote:
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 6:42 AM David Runge <dave at sleepmap.de 
> <mailto:dave at sleepmap.de>> wrote:
> 
>     On 2022-01-25 16:02:29 (-0700), Paul Davis wrote:
>      > Again, PipeWire *is* JACK and it is also PulseAudio. It it not a
>      > replacement for PulseAudio, it is a replacement for both of them.
>     Once
>      > you are using PipeWire, everything you've read about JACK bridging
>      > etc. becomes incorrect and irrelevant.
> 
>     That is technically not necessarily true, as it depends on how the build
>     of pipewire is configured
> 
> I was wrong, for sure.
> 
> But as a policy question, I think this is probably a serious mistake by 
> the pipewire team (probably mostly just Wim).

I think it shows consideration for the actual users of the system[*], 
and for a transition to a new implementation of jackd without 
necessarily breaking existing workflows for users of jackd.

> It has been bad enough 
> having 2 independent, different implementations of the JACK API. Now 
> Pipewire adds a 3rd (not great, but also not so bad), but then in 
> addition says "oh, you don't *have* to use this implementation, the 
> others are still available". In terms of the famed "user flexibility" 
> this is, uhm, cool I suppose. But in terms of Pipewire's broader goals, 
> it just adds to (and continues) the mess.

I find it great that it is possible to test pipewire (the pulseaudio 
replacement stuff and the jack stuff independently), report problems, 
and go back to plain old jackd if your audio workflow is somewhat 
compromised or unstable.

That is what I do on Fedora - it is possible to install either the 
pipewire implementation of jackd, or the "normal" jackd (jack2, 
actually, which I still use in my regular audio work)

> I hope they change this in the future once the Pipewire JACK 
> implementation is suitable (or maybe even before).

Nope, not before please...
Best,
-- Fernando

[*] old timers might remember the transition to pulseaudio, which was 
not, let's say, graceful...


More information about the Linux-audio-user mailing list