10 Jan
2012
10 Jan
'12
4:13 p.m.
On 01/10/12 15:43, gene heskett wrote:
Yup, will do, tonight. I don't have any logs at hand. It's about a 64bit
system though and right now at #opensourcemusicians there are already
some people who have no issues with a 32bit system.
Best,
Jeremy
On Tuesday, January 10, 2012 09:28:12 AM Jeremy
Jongepier did opine:
Hello Gene,
I know, I meant real-time as in patched with the RT patchset.
On 01/10/12 01:07, Diego Simak wrote:
This isn't exactly realtime, where latencies measured in small numbers of
microseconds count big time. If that kernel is not suitable for you (I mean,
you get a lot of
xruns), then you can use the PREEMPT or RT Kernels that are included
in the Official Ubuntu Repositories (which are configured in the apt
sources automatically) and see how it works before going to a manual
kernel compillation.
10.04 does have a real-time kernel in the repos, 2.6.31-rt. But the
2.6.33 real-time kernel from Tango Studio is superior. At least, I
didn't have a lot of success with the real-time kernel from the Ubuntu
repos while the one from Tango Studios is still going strong.
Later versions of Ubuntu do not have a real-time kernel available
anymore, only via PPA's. But indeed, with the whole IRQ threading thing
being merged in the mainline kernel you could ask yourself, do I really
need a real-time kernel. In my case I dare to say yes, haven't done any
A-B testing with a low-latency kernel but I get the feeling that I can
get the most out of a real-time kernel. That's why I'm thinking about
switching to Arch but unfortunately the 3.0 real-time kernel is not
stable enough (it crashes on any plug-in that uses the Juce framework,
need to file a bugreport).
Get it filed then. The quicker its filed, the quicker it will get fixed
(if its not Juce's fault that is.)
Best,
Jeremy
Cheers, Gene