3 May
2009
3 May
'09
10:40 p.m.
I'm still on Debian "etch" here, getting ready to upgrade to lenny, and
I have noticed many here talking about audio work on lenny.
However, apparently Ardour is no longer in the distro, and Jack is a
version which is considered buggy upstream according to the
recommendations on the Ardour download page online. (And presumably
every Jack-enabled audio app in Debian is compiled against this buggy
version...yuck.)
What's the most common/recommended way for Debian users to keep their
DAW working these days on lenny? I can't switch the machine over to
Ubuntu right now because I need to upgrade in place with no reinstalls.
It was encouraging to see some of you talking about audio work on lenny,
so I assume there is some way around this?
--
+ Brent A. Busby + "We've all heard that a million monkeys
+ UNIX Systems Admin + banging on a million typewriters will
+ University of Chicago + eventually reproduce the entire works of
+ Physical Sciences Div. + Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet,
+ James Franck Institute + we know this is not true." -Robert Wilensky
3 May
3 May
11:44 p.m.
On Sun, May 03, 2009 at 07:40:30PM -0500, Brent Busby wrote:
I'm still on Debian "etch" here, getting
ready to upgrade to lenny,
and I have noticed many here talking about audio work on lenny.
However, apparently Ardour is no longer in the distro, [...]
ardour is not in Lenny.
ardour is in Squeeze (testing) at the moment, version 2.7.1.
ardour is also in Sid (unstable), version 2.8-1.
and Jack is a version which is considered buggy
upstream according to
the recommendations on the Ardour download page online.
jackd is in Lenny (stable) based on 0.109.2 with many distribution level
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
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.
But a version of 0.109.2 does meet the primary constraint of "JACK 0.109
or later".
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.
(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.
ardour in Sid states a dependency on jackd later than 0.103.0. If you
know it can only work with an even later version of jackd, then please
file a bug.
What's the most common/recommended way for Debian
users to keep their
DAW working these days on lenny? I can't switch the machine over to
Ubuntu right now because I need to upgrade in place with no reinstalls.
It was encouraging to see some of you talking about audio work on lenny,
so I assume there is some way around this?
I'd normally cherry-pick from the testing packages if it was important.
But in the situation you cite, it is entirely possible that the killer
bugs for jackd may have been fixed by backporting fixes to jackd or
ardour, and so you can't rely on the version numbers to prove there is a
problem.
If you wish to build Ardour rather than install from Debian, then yes,
you should follow the building instructions closely.
--
James Cameron mailto:quozl@us.netrek.org http://quozl.netrek.org/
4 May
4 May
10:10 a.m.
On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 9:43 PM, James Cameron <quozl(a)us.netrek.org> wrote:
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.
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.
10:08 p.m.
On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 08:10:35AM -0400, Paul Davis wrote:
In the absence of social behaviour by the packagers, upstream has to
take what it can get.
--
James Cameron mailto:quozl@us.netrek.org http://quozl.netrek.org/
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.
Good to know, thanks.
i would have been
happier if ever distro had taken careful note of this and replaced
0.109 but of course ... no.
Presumably a lack of effort on the part of the packagers.
no, the bugs were very much deeper than any
distribution patches.
also, please note that (a) debian has *never* pushed their patches
upstream [...]
Yes, that's annoying. I'm upstream for pptp and pptpd, and I have to go
dig in Debian and Ubuntu patches if I want anything to come out of it.
The packagers rarely directly engage upstream. Then again nor are they
*required* to engage by the license.
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. 
5 May
5 May
1:03 a.m.
On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 08:10:35AM -0400, Paul Davis wrote:
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.
What steps, specifically? I'd be willing to do them if they're not too invasive.
Then again, if I can get a packaged version I'd much rather do that, and stay within
the package manager's system.
-ken
On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 9:43 PM, James Cameron
<quozl(a)us.netrek.org> wrote:
Awesome! So is 0.116.1 the most stable, advised JACK version to use?
Second question: if I download (or build) a Lenny-backported package of 0.116.1 on a Lenny
system (backporting, basically), will all my other existing JACK apps still work? Or do I
need to rebuild all of those too?
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.
5684
days inactive
5685
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
4 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Brent Busby -
James Cameron -
Ken Restivo -
Paul Davis