28 Aug
2004
28 Aug
'04
7:31 p.m.
Hi all,
Anyone know when CCRMA will be switching to FC2 and the 2.6 kernel?
Rick B
28 Aug
28 Aug
7:38 p.m.
On Sat, 2004-08-28 at 17:15, Rick wrote:
Hi all,
Anyone know when CCRMA will be switching to FC2 and the 2.6 kernel?
Probably when 2.6 is ready for low latency audio work. It's pretty much
there on UP, but there are some unresolved SMP issues. These are
allegedly fixed in the very latest voluntary preemption patches, but
these are only a few minutes old, and no one has had a chance to test
yet.
Lee
8:41 p.m.
On Sat, 2004-08-28 at 14:15, Rick wrote:
Hi all,
Anyone know when CCRMA will be switching to FC2 and the 2.6 kernel?
The question in not completely clear to me. You surely mean Planet CCRMA
and not CCRMA itself, right?
Planet CCRMA supports FC2, so it is not a matter of switching (I
currently support several versions of redhat/fedora). I just don't
currently recommend using FC2 unless you know that there are (were?)
still some latency problems, when compared to 2.4.x.
On Sat, 2004-08-28 at 14:22, Lee Revell wrote:
Probably when 2.6 is ready for low latency audio work.
It's pretty much
there on UP, but there are some unresolved SMP issues. These are
allegedly fixed in the very latest voluntary preemption patches, but
these are only a few minutes old, and no one has had a chance to test
yet.
I'm building them..... tests hopefully coming up soon :-)
-- Fernando
9:16 p.m.
Fernando Pablo Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
On Sat, 2004-08-28 at 14:15, Rick wrote:
Sorry, yes I meant Planet CCRMA. I was wondering when I could go to
the CCRMA website and download the modified iso's of FC2 (with apt as
the default package manager) and the modified kernel. Wish I could say
that I was doing some important audio work, but I mainly use Planet
CCRMA's version of Fedora and the modified kernel for gaming, as
benchmarks show better results than with other distro's and kernels on
similar equipment.
Rick B
Hi all,
Anyone know when CCRMA will be switching to FC2 and the 2.6 kernel?
The question in not completely clear to me. You surely mean Planet CCRMA
and not CCRMA itself, right?
Planet CCRMA supports FC2, so it is not a matter of switching (I
currently support several versions of redhat/fedora). I just don't
currently recommend using FC2 unless you know that there are (were?)
still some latency problems, when compared to 2.4.x.
On Sat, 2004-08-28 at 14:22, Lee Revell wrote:
Probably when 2.6 is ready for low latency audio
work. It's pretty much
there on UP, but there are some unresolved SMP issues. These are
allegedly fixed in the very latest voluntary preemption patches, but
these are only a few minutes old, and no one has had a chance to test
yet.
I'm building them..... tests hopefully coming up soon :-)
-- Fernando
9:45 p.m.
On Sat, 2004-08-28 at 16:00, Rick wrote:
Fernando Pablo Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
I don't know when things will be ready, until then I prefer not to
create iso's. For now I still recommend FC1 for low latency audio (but
we are getting really close :-).
-- Fernando
On Sat, 2004-08-28 at 14:15, Rick wrote:
Sorry, yes I meant Planet CCRMA. I was wondering when I could go to
the CCRMA website and download the modified iso's of FC2 (with apt as
the default package manager) and the modified kernel. Wish I could say
that I was doing some important audio work, but I mainly use Planet
CCRMA's version of Fedora and the modified kernel for gaming, as
benchmarks show better results than with other distro's and kernels on
similar equipment. Hi all,
Anyone know when CCRMA will be switching to FC2 and the 2.6 kernel?
The question in not completely clear to me. You surely mean Planet CCRMA
and not CCRMA itself, right?
10:01 p.m.
Fernando Pablo Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
On Sat, 2004-08-28 at 16:00, Rick wrote:
Thanks for your time Fernando. I admit I get a little impatient at
times, but for now I still am getting better performance than most with
the 2.4.26-1.ll kernel.
Rick B
Fernando Pablo Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
I don't know when things will be ready, until then I prefer not to
create iso's. For now I still recommend FC1 for low latency audio (but
we are getting really close :-).
-- Fernando
On Sat, 2004-08-28 at 14:15, Rick wrote:
Sorry, yes I meant Planet CCRMA. I was wondering when I could go to
the CCRMA website and download the modified iso's of FC2 (with apt as
the default package manager) and the modified kernel. Wish I could say
that I was doing some important audio work, but I mainly use Planet
CCRMA's version of Fedora and the modified kernel for gaming, as
benchmarks show better results than with other distro's and kernels on
similar equipment.
Hi all,
Anyone know when CCRMA will be switching to FC2 and the 2.6 kernel?
The question in not completely clear to me. You surely mean Planet CCRMA
and not CCRMA itself, right?
10:29 p.m.
Thanks for your time Fernando. I admit I get a
little impatient at
times, but for now I still am getting better performance than most with
the 2.4.26-1.ll kernel.
I never liked DeadRat distros much... too much odd bloat and "let's be
different just to be different". Have you guys looked at YOPER? It's RPM
*and* pkg/tgz package aware, every binary + library is built for i686 as a
base minimum, and it's very "granular" in terms of what you install with
it,
in the way of Slackware (which is normally my preference, however I'll
accept that most "newbies" will find that sort of "bare-bones" UNIX
install
to be daunting).
<http://www.yoper.com/> for more information.
Cheers!
=MB=
--
A focus on Quality.
10:53 p.m.
On Sat, 2004-08-28 at 17:13 -0700, Malcolm Baldridge wrote:
Checked this out real qwik...
That's not a bad looking setup. Are you using it at present? What are
it's advantages? Does it have a repository of it's own rpm's or can you
install rpm's from other distro's? What about kernel packages, etc? Is
the installer in need of a Masters in Comp science?
R~
Thanks for
your time Fernando. I admit I get a little impatient at
times, but for now I still am getting better performance than most with
the 2.4.26-1.ll kernel.
I never liked DeadRat distros much... too much odd bloat and "let's be
different just to be different". Have you guys looked at YOPER? It's RPM
*and* pkg/tgz package aware, every binary + library is built for i686 as a
base minimum, and it's very "granular" in terms of what you install with
it,
in the way of Slackware (which is normally my preference, however I'll
accept that most "newbies" will find that sort of "bare-bones" UNIX
install
to be daunting).
<http://www.yoper.com/> for more information.
Cheers!
=MB=
--
Russell Hanaghan <hanaghan(a)starband.net>
11:15 p.m.
Checked this out real qwik...
That's not a bad looking setup. Are you using it at present? What are
it's advantages? Does it have a repository of it's own rpm's or can you
install rpm's from other distro's? What about kernel packages, etc? Is
the installer in need of a Masters in Comp science?
I've only just discovered it a few days ago, burned a copy, and installed it
onto a Compaq Presario 2103US of all things.
It went smoothly, and came up into an attractive GNOME-ish GUI which ran
*VERY* well despite the machine only having 256MB of RAM. Historically,
KDE/DeadRat feels more like M$ Windows XP in terms of bringing powerful
machines to their knees unless very amply configured. But I will concede
that my sensitivities to performance issues are probably more than most.
GUI/OS responsiveness rates extremely highly for me. The odd "lags" and
choppy scrolling and window-tearing during dragging of Mac OSX for example
disqualify it completely, though clearly lots of people don't mind it.
I have no horror stories yet.
If you can, give it a try.
=MB=
--
A focus on Quality.
11:36 p.m.
On Sat, 2004-08-28 at 17:58 -0700, Malcolm Baldridge wrote:
Downloading the "iso" now! :) One iso...now there's a breathe of fresh
air! Just downloaded MDK 10.1. Lucked out and got a fast ftp
connection.
Will sing out when I get a chance to install it on something...Likely my
Dell CPxJ will get it first.
R~
--
Russell Hanaghan <hanaghan(a)starband.net>
Checked this
out real qwik...
That's not a bad looking setup. Are you using it at present? What are
it's advantages? Does it have a repository of it's own rpm's or can you
install rpm's from other distro's? What about kernel packages, etc? Is
the installer in need of a Masters in Comp science?
I've only just discovered it a few days ago, burned a copy, and installed it
onto a Compaq Presario 2103US of all things.
It went smoothly, and came up into an attractive GNOME-ish GUI which ran
*VERY* well despite the machine only having 256MB of RAM. Historically,
KDE/DeadRat feels more like M$ Windows XP in terms of bringing powerful
machines to their knees unless very amply configured. But I will concede
that my sensitivities to performance issues are probably more than most.
GUI/OS responsiveness rates extremely highly for me. The odd "lags" and
choppy scrolling and window-tearing during dragging of Mac OSX for example
disqualify it completely, though clearly lots of people don't mind it.
I have no horror stories yet.
If you can, give it a try.
=MB=
29 Aug
29 Aug
8:59 p.m.
On Sat, 2004-08-28 at 17:58 -0700, Malcolm Baldridge wrote:
Finally got this downloaded, burnt and installed on a Dell CPxj 650 P3
with 256 mb ram.
They sure did a neat job of this...Had a bit of delay with the HD
formatting but this was no fault of the installer...or should I say the
Yopers installer! :) Easy install!
So packaging>>> I'm sadly a victim of Father time. One of the good
things about Mandrake is the fact that I can install packages built by
others. Yes, I have to live with their configuration options but that's
been a price I've been willing to pay. Thac's is usually right on the
money. I was looking through the Kpackage and SYnaptic interfaces. Is it
possible we would be able to use Suse packages? Some stuff i will build
but wonder if other rpm packages might work here too. Of course I'm
assuming there is no one building DAW apps for Yopers. And what of the
kernel? I see they are running 2.6.8...but will I have to build my own
kernels to get RT capabilities?
So far though, this is a neat distro...A single CD install, snappy
response...lots of Eye candy and light weight! And many useful apps
that I see.
R~
Checked this
out real qwik...
That's not a bad looking setup. Are you using it at present? What are
it's advantages? Does it have a repository of it's own rpm's or can you
install rpm's from other distro's? What about kernel packages, etc? Is
the installer in need of a Masters in Comp science?
I've only just discovered it a few days ago, burned a copy, and installed it
onto a Compaq Presario 2103US of all things.
It went smoothly, and came up into an attractive GNOME-ish GUI which ran
*VERY* well despite the machine only having 256MB of RAM. Historically,
KDE/DeadRat feels more like M$ Windows XP in terms of bringing powerful
machines to their knees unless very amply configured. But I will concede
that my sensitivities to performance issues are probably more than most.
GUI/OS responsiveness rates extremely highly for me. The odd "lags" and
choppy scrolling and window-tearing during dragging of Mac OSX for example
disqualify it completely, though clearly lots of people don't mind it.
I have no horror stories yet.
If you can, give it a try.
=MB=
--
Russell Hanaghan <hanaghan(a)starband.net>
30 Aug
30 Aug
1:40 a.m.
On Wed, 2004-09-29 at 15:43 -0700, Russell Hanaghan wrote:
On Sat, 2004-08-28 at 17:58 -0700, Malcolm Baldridge
wrote:
Finally got this downloaded, burnt and installed on a Dell CPxj 650 P3
with 256 mb ram.
They sure did a neat job of this...Had a bit of delay with the HD
formatting but this was no fault of the installer...or should I say the
Yopers installer! :) Easy install!
So packaging>>> I'm sadly a victim of Father time. One of the good
things about Mandrake is the fact that I can install packages built by
others. Yes, I have to live with their configuration options but that's
been a price I've been willing to pay. Thac's is usually right on the
money. I was looking through the Kpackage and SYnaptic interfaces. Is it
possible we would be able to use Suse packages? Some stuff i will build
but wonder if other rpm packages might work here too. Of course I'm
assuming there is no one building DAW apps for Yopers. And what of the
kernel? I see they are running 2.6.8...but will I have to build my own
kernels to get RT capabilities?
So far though, this is a neat distro...A single CD install, snappy
response...lots of Eye candy and light weight! And many useful apps
that I see.
R~
Ok...I'm seriously having a torrid fling with this OS!! I think I'm in
lust! :)
After some messing about with packages from Suse, MDK, etc, and with the
use of Kpackage, I have been able to get Jack and Ardour up! THe crappy
Maestro3 chip in this laptop would, at best, run @ 1024 x 2 on the
2.4.22 kernel...running as root _without_ a patched 2.6.8 kernel in KDE
no less, jack is running @ 512 x 2 with next to no Xruns! I have not
tried recording or playback in Ardour yet but that's.
I'm going to try some more stuff but there are some VERY cool things
about this distro out of the box. Early days but I'm excited!! :)
R~
Checked
this out real qwik...
That's not a bad looking setup. Are you using it at present? What are
it's advantages? Does it have a repository of it's own rpm's or can you
install rpm's from other distro's? What about kernel packages, etc? Is
the installer in need of a Masters in Comp science?
I've only just discovered it a few days ago, burned a copy, and installed it
onto a Compaq Presario 2103US of all things.
It went smoothly, and came up into an attractive GNOME-ish GUI which ran
*VERY* well despite the machine only having 256MB of RAM. Historically,
KDE/DeadRat feels more like M$ Windows XP in terms of bringing powerful
machines to their knees unless very amply configured. But I will concede
that my sensitivities to performance issues are probably more than most.
GUI/OS responsiveness rates extremely highly for me. The odd "lags" and
choppy scrolling and window-tearing during dragging of Mac OSX for example
disqualify it completely, though clearly lots of people don't mind it.
I have no horror stories yet.
If you can, give it a try. >
> =MB=
--
Russell Hanaghan <hanaghan(a)starband.net>
2:36 p.m.
When you all read this in SEPTEMBER, you'll really enjoy it!! :)
R~
On Wed, 2004-09-29 at 20:24 -0700, Russell Hanaghan wrote:
On Wed, 2004-09-29 at 15:43 -0700, Russell Hanaghan
wrote:
--
Russell Hanaghan <hanaghan(a)starband.net>
On Sat, 2004-08-28 at 17:58 -0700, Malcolm
Baldridge wrote:
Finally got this downloaded, burnt and installed on a Dell CPxj 650 P3
with 256 mb ram.
They sure did a neat job of this...Had a bit of delay with the HD
formatting but this was no fault of the installer...or should I say the
Yopers installer! :) Easy install!
So packaging>>> I'm sadly a victim of Father time. One of the good
things about Mandrake is the fact that I can install packages built by
others. Yes, I have to live with their configuration options but that's
been a price I've been willing to pay. Thac's is usually right on the
money. I was looking through the Kpackage and SYnaptic interfaces. Is it
possible we would be able to use Suse packages? Some stuff i will build
but wonder if other rpm packages might work here too. Of course I'm
assuming there is no one building DAW apps for Yopers. And what of the
kernel? I see they are running 2.6.8...but will I have to build my own
kernels to get RT capabilities?
So far though, this is a neat distro...A single CD install, snappy
response...lots of Eye candy and light weight! And many useful apps
that I see.
R~
Ok...I'm seriously having a torrid fling with this OS!! I think I'm in
lust! :)
After some messing about with packages from Suse, MDK, etc, and with the
use of Kpackage, I have been able to get Jack and Ardour up! THe crappy
Maestro3 chip in this laptop would, at best, run @ 1024 x 2 on the
2.4.22 kernel...running as root _without_ a patched 2.6.8 kernel in KDE
no less, jack is running @ 512 x 2 with next to no Xruns! I have not
tried recording or playback in Ardour yet but that's.
I'm going to try some more stuff but there are some VERY cool things
about this distro out of the box. Early days but I'm excited!! :)
R~
> >
> > =MB= Checked
this out real qwik...
That's not a bad looking setup. Are you using it at present? What are
it's advantages? Does it have a repository of it's own rpm's or can you
install rpm's from other distro's? What about kernel packages, etc? Is
the installer in need of a Masters in Comp science?
I've only just discovered it a few days ago, burned a copy, and installed it
onto a Compaq Presario 2103US of all things.
It went smoothly, and came up into an attractive GNOME-ish GUI which ran
*VERY* well despite the machine only having 256MB of RAM. Historically,
KDE/DeadRat feels more like M$ Windows XP in terms of bringing powerful
machines to their knees unless very amply configured. But I will concede
that my sensitivities to performance issues are probably more than most.
GUI/OS responsiveness rates extremely highly for me. The odd "lags" and
choppy scrolling and window-tearing during dragging of Mac OSX for example
disqualify it completely, though clearly lots of people don't mind it.
I have no horror stories yet.
If you can, give it a try.
4:09 p.m.
On Sat, 2004-08-28 at 17:13 -0700, Malcolm Baldridge wrote:
I just emailed these guys to see if there's intent or interest in DAW
stuff...as in packages.
Will see what they say and bring it back here.
R~
Thanks for
your time Fernando. I admit I get a little impatient at
times, but for now I still am getting better performance than most with
the 2.4.26-1.ll kernel.
I never liked DeadRat distros much... too much odd bloat and "let's be
different just to be different". Have you guys looked at YOPER? It's RPM
*and* pkg/tgz package aware, every binary + library is built for i686 as a
base minimum, and it's very "granular" in terms of what you install with
it,
in the way of Slackware (which is normally my preference, however I'll
accept that most "newbies" will find that sort of "bare-bones" UNIX
install
to be daunting).
<http://www.yoper.com/> for more information.
Cheers!
=MB=
--
Russell Hanaghan <hanaghan(a)starband.net>
7314
days inactive
7316
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
13 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Fernando Pablo Lopez-Lezcano -
Lee Revell -
Malcolm Baldridge -
Rick -
Russell Hanaghan