4 Feb
2008
4 Feb
'08
8:37 a.m.
On Sat, Feb 02, 2008 at 08:22:20PM +0200, Juuso Alasuutari wrote:
1) Switch to using the JACK D-Bus interface for
lashd<->jackd communication.
Paul D. has already replied to this...
2) Add a D-Bus control interface to LASH, which is
supposed to
eventually replace the current liblash server interface API.
3) Change the liblash client interface's internals
to use D-Bus for
communication with lashd.
I fail the see the advantage of D-Bus over e.g. OSC via UDP or TCP.
Last time I looked at the lash sources, the protocol was really
just one small step away from OSC - it would have taken an hour
or two to do the conversion.
Other consideration: any form of session management for the
systems I'm using would have to be at least a two-layer affair.
There is a first layer of 'system' apss talking to jack and
creating a working environment - this is all monitoring and
rendering stuff.
The second level is user sessions, also consisting of several
apps talking to jack. They *use* this existing environment but
should not be allowed to modify it.
For anything like lash to be useful here it would need to support
this layering.
--
FA
Laboratorio di Acustica ed Elettroacustica
Parma, Italia
Lascia la spina, cogli la rosa.