On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 9:43 PM, James Cameron <quozl(a)us.netrek.org> wrote:
patches, some of which change the source code. I've reviewed the patch.
My guess is that you should consider this 0.109.2-5 as different to
0.109.2.
jackd is in Squeeze (testing) at 0.116.1
as the front page at
jackaudio.org notes: "Nobody should be using
0.109.X". yes, it apparently works but there are so many deep, deep
bugs in that version that i lost count of them. i would have been
happier if ever distro had taken careful note of this and replaced
0.109 but of course ... no.
The ardour recommendation you refer to is probably the
building section,
at
http://www.ardour.org/building where it says "JACK 0.109 or later,
preferably 0.116 or later to avoid a buggy version of JACK (libjack)".
Unfortunately this doesn't say exactly which bug was fixed, so it is
impractical to find whether the bug was fixed in a backport, e.g.
the Debian Lenny jackd 0.109.2-5.
no, the bugs were very much deeper than any distribution patches.
also, please note that (a) debian has *never* pushed their patches
upstream (b) we believe we have included all the debian patches in
0.116.
Also, the ardour build on Debian may have been
adjusted already to
compensate for this problem. There are about 6000 lines in the diff for
the Sid version.
once again, these patches have never been pushed upstream. incredibly
anti-social behaviour.
(And
presumably every Jack-enabled audio app in Debian is compiled
against this buggy version...yuck.)
Yes, but if the API doesn't change unduly, every Jack-enabled
audio app in Lenny should work fine with a later version of Jack, all
you have to do is install the later version and you shouldn't need to
recompile the other apps.
Correct. Except that this assumes you get a later *package* version of
JACK. With these "old" debian systems, you can't install JACK from
source and get existing apps to work without a couple of additional
steps.