1 Jun
2009
1 Jun
'09
7:36 a.m.
From: Asmo Koskinen <asmo.koskinen(a)arkki.info>
Subject: Re: [LAU] ubuntu realtime.
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-studio-users/2009-April/004507.html
And then there was a long discuss about Ubuntu Studio.
Cory stepped down, all others in the team are here:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuStudio/TeamStructure
Maybe Debian, 64 Studio, Musix or CCRMA have much more stable and active
community around them, I really do not know. Right now Ubuntu Studio is
not so strong, I think.
Best Regards Asmo Koskinen.
Hi,
I'm sad to hear that there has not been enough user contribution to the project and I
can imagine the workload Cory and others have been struggling with. Unfortunately I have
to admit that I've also been just enjoying their work more than helping to get things
done or fixed. Perhaps I should try to put some effort on those testing and documentation
parts mentioned.
The most alarming point however was the statement that the upstream is not responding to
the studio devel team requests. I don't know if the upstream upgrades and fixes can be
speed up but at least the communication should work to get anything accomplished.
Regarding the financial and motivational part of the core team it seems that it really
would be important to get more active and supportive users. Recently the Ardour team had a
wide discussion about the financial problems of the project. I don't know if same kind
of model could be used with Ubuntu Studio?
At least it seems that Ardour dev team has managed to get the donations and 'feature
sponsoring' working quite well. Perhaps similar kind of a system could help the core
team to develop the system and even tempt new talented and dedicated developers still
keeping the Ubuntu Studio free for all.
Best regards:
Aapo Romu
1 Jun
1 Jun
9:35 a.m.
Beepo / Vanguard wrote:
I'm sad to hear that there has not been enough user contribution to the project and I
can imagine the workload Cory and others have been struggling with. Unfortunately I have
to admit that I've also been just enjoying their work more than helping to get things
done or fixed. Perhaps I should try to put some effort on those testing and documentation
parts mentioned.
The most alarming point however was the statement that the upstream is not responding to
the studio devel team requests. I don't know if the upstream upgrades and fixes can be
speed up but at least the communication should work to get anything accomplished.
The problems I've encountered on Intrepid and US/Jaunty are not unusual.
They have been reported by many users, the Ubuntu forums are filled with
such complaints. Somewhere in the wilderness (i.e. the Ubuntu forums)
there is a graph that illustrates the difference between successful
installs of 8.10 and the unsuccessfuls. The unsuccessfuls number at
better than twice as many. Alas, the same problems plague me now as were
problematic before. The rt kernel still blows up when acpi is enabled,
exits and shutdowns fail, the audio configuration is still dependent
upon Pulseaudio, the setup for pro-audio is still too manual, et cetera
et cetera. These issues were all well-known with Intrepid.
I understand that the team probably needs more help. But what does it
take to identify and recognize persistent problems ? Am I posting to the
forums in vain ? Not one developer, whether for core Ubuntu or UStudio,
ever responded to my posts, and the problems and annoyances remain.
Luke Macneil has packaged an rt kernel that's reported to work with
UStudio 9.04. I'm going to try to set it up on my desktop box today. If
that doesn't resolve the kernel-related issues then I'll be done with
UStudio until they repair the breakage.
Btw, I use nVidia's binary drivers. I'm perfectly aware of the odium
that attaches to those binaries, but I don't believe that they are the
problem, not when users report the identical problems occurring on ATI
and other GPUs. And those binaries work perfectly with my 64 Studio
installations and my JAD box, without degrading performance.
I say again: I like Ubuntu, I think it's a neat system with a great
desktop. It just also sucks in some areas that critically matter to me.
Best,
dp
11:29 a.m.
The problems I've encountered on Intrepid and US/Jaunty are not unusual.
They have been reported by many users, the Ubuntu forums are filled with
Dave I think you are correct and that is my experience.
I don't think they are not taking enough risks to make it a true studio program
for audio. For that you need to be devoted to audio like 64studio and others
and like you said be able to rip out pulse if you want. Apparently, if they did
push too far in the rt realm, it might take away from of general goodness of
ubuntu. I'm not trying to criticize the ubuntu rt team, I feel that they are
under too many constraints and need more leeway to really make the thing work
right. Maybe their priority is really graphics?
Currently, I really don't need rt so I'm now happy using the standard ubuntu
with only a few tweaks and re-building of more recent programs (and the 2.6.29
kernel for safe EXT4 use). However, last time I tried an rt kernel was a few
months ago in Jaunty testing and it wouldn't even get past the boot loader. I
had a few emails with a developer, but decided it wasn't worth my time for
something I'm not going to use anyway.
I've read reports of people using debian with 2.6.29.x-rtx and having very good
results after tweaking. I assume the same would be for ubuntu with the proper
tweaking.
Just a few thoughts, Geoff
1:16 p.m.
Geoff King kirjoitti:
I've read reports of people using debian with
2.6.29.x-rtx and having very good
results after tweaking. I assume the same would be for ubuntu with the proper
tweaking.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-rt/+bug/366352/comments/7
Because thare are no x86_64 versions of those Luke Macneil's packages I
did follow this howto for building new kernel for my desktop machine.
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/HowToVanillaKernelWithRealtimePreemption
And then of course this one.
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuStudioPreparation
-->8--
root@ubuntu-studio:/usr/src# ls
linux linux-2.6.29.4 linux-2.6.29.4.tar.bz2 linux-headers-2.6.28-3-rt
linux-headers-2.6.29.4-rt16_1_amd64.deb
linux-image-2.6.29.4-rt16_1_amd64.deb linux-rt-headers-2.6.28-3
patch-2.6.29.4-rt16.bz2
root@ubuntu-studio:/usr/src# chmod 755 *.deb
root@ubuntu-studio:/usr/src# dpkg -i *.deb
Valitaan aikaisemmin valitsematon paketti linux-headers-2.6.29.4-rt16.
(Luetaan tietokantaa... 149056 tiedostoa ja hakemistoa tällä hetkellä
asennettuna.)
Puretaan pakettia linux-headers-2.6.29.4-rt16
(linux-headers-2.6.29.4-rt16_1_amd64.deb)...
Valitaan aikaisemmin valitsematon paketti linux-image-2.6.29.4-rt16.
Puretaan pakettia linux-image-2.6.29.4-rt16
(linux-image-2.6.29.4-rt16_1_amd64.deb)...
Done.
Tehdään asetuksia: linux-headers-2.6.29.4-rt16 (1) ...
Tehdään asetuksia: linux-image-2.6.29.4-rt16 (1) ...
Running depmod.
-->8--
I can boot, I can start jackd and ardour2 and I can play a year old
short something.
http://www.arkki.info/howto/Ubuntu_Studio/Jaunty/Kernel-2.6.29.4-rt16.png
And I can listen Radio Paradise vith VLC (network works, too) with that
very latest linux vanilla kernel.
----
Of course I should work many hours with that kernel so I can say
something about it's stability in Ubuntu Studio 9.04.
But yes, you can build it in Ubuntu Studio 9.04, if you like to try that
one over Ubuntu's own.
And my desktop machine is pure Intel, no NVidia/ATI or something like
that. And soundcard is Delta 66, integrated audio disabled by bios.
Best Regards Asmo Koskinen.
7 p.m.
Asmo Koskinen kirjoitti:
http://www.arkki.info/howto/Ubuntu_Studio/Jaunty/Kernel-2.6.29.4-rt16.png
And I can listen Radio Paradise vith VLC (network works, too) with that
very latest linux vanilla kernel.
Here is one more. Bare with me, this is my last one about this topic.
With that brand new rt kernel I can listen Radio Paradise (alsa, Delta
66) and same time record that radio station from speakers by firewire
soundcard (jackd, ardour2, Audiofire4) and phantom microphone.
Screenshot:
http://www.arkki.info/howto/Ubuntu_Studio/Jaunty/Kernel-2.6.29.4-rt16-2.png
Picture:
http://www.arkki.info/howto/Ubuntu_Studio/Jaunty/Kernel-2.6.29.4-rt16-3.png
So maybe it is better cook yourself your own kernel package for Ubuntu
Studio 9.04.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-rt/+bug/290498/comments/40
Best Regards Asmo Koskinen.
2 Jun
2 Jun
5:20 a.m.
Dave Phillips wrote:
I say again: I like Ubuntu, I think it's a neat system with a great
desktop. It just also sucks in some areas that critically matter to me.
Yes, I agree here ..
Perhaps many distributions are working hard to look after a subset of
users who's main concerns are quite valid - they want a system that
'just works' when used for their tasks. It is 'a good thing' IMHO if
some distributions are successful in this, if some distributions 'just
work' for typical office tasks, others 'just work' for typical home
tasks [there is a lot of overlap here] then the number of individuals
and companies using linux will increase, the demand for hardware
manufactures to support linux will increase, maybe more computers will
be available retail with linux pre-installed - all this helps increase
the number of developers working on linux as a system, and the number of
people who grow up with linux as their default system because it is in
their school, or at home, when they first start using a computer.
I am unlikely to use such a distribution - it is not put together to
cater for my needs. As a specialist user of linux with specialist needs
I expect to have to deal with the system on a much more basic level, I
need to use a distribution that is much more basic and allows manual
configuration, maybe if I am lucky I may find a specialist distribution
that is adapted and pre-configured by people with the same needs. It is
slower initially, but eventually much more efficient, to do
configurations from scratch rather than trying to un-configure a tightly
put together system that is not suited to my needs.
The most long-established user base for linux is in the server world -
hence the very strict definition of what is 'stable' in distribution
systems such as Debian, which for my purposes tends to equate with 'out
of date'. Most of the time I don't need my machines to be as reliable or
secure as a webserver or database server needs to be, I've found
'unstable' more to my needs. Luckily I am not alone - currently I'm
using Sidux [the Xfce version] as the starting point for my systems, but
there are lots of choices out there.
IMHO asking a distribution to be more flexible at the cost of being
puzzing to the novice is a bit unfair if the principle aims of that
distribution are to give an unambitious user a complete 'it just works'
solution to their most common needs.
It is easy to have a machine dual-bootable and use one distribution for
home/office use and another for specialist purposes if required.
Simon
6:10 a.m.
2009/6/2 Simon Wise <simonzwise(a)gmail.com>
Dave Phillips wrote:
As someone said, Ubuntu is debian sid/unstable with lipstick.
Now, I can't really figure out how can Ubuntu Studio be such a bad distro
for multimedia productions but I can surely say that debian testing/squeeze
with a 2.6.29.4-rt works great and so did with the previous kernel releases
(after the midi issues in 2.6.26 kernels have been fixed).
IMHO users should be allowed to install rt kernels or driver for new
hardware from unofficial repos instead of being forced to use multimedia
distros in order to reach low latencies, more users more testing more
problems being fixed.
Tracking 5, 6, 7 distro in somewhat "scrappy".
One of the thing I would really like to know is the "diff" between those
multimedia distros, apart from package versions.
cheers
-r
I say again: I like Ubuntu, I think it's a neat system with a great
desktop. It just also sucks in some areas that critically matter to me.
Yes, I agree here ..
Perhaps many distributions are working hard to look after a subset of
users who's main concerns are quite valid - they want a system that
'just works' when used for their tasks. It is 'a good thing' IMHO if
some distributions are successful in this, if some distributions 'just
work' for typical office tasks, others 'just work' for typical home
tasks [there is a lot of overlap here] then the number of individuals
and companies using linux will increase, the demand for hardware
manufactures to support linux will increase, maybe more computers will
be available retail with linux pre-installed - all this helps increase
the number of developers working on linux as a system, and the number of
people who grow up with linux as their default system because it is in
their school, or at home, when they first start using a computer.
I am unlikely to use such a distribution - it is not put together to
cater for my needs. As a specialist user of linux with specialist needs
I expect to have to deal with the system on a much more basic level, I
need to use a distribution that is much more basic and allows manual
configuration, maybe if I am lucky I may find a specialist distribution
that is adapted and pre-configured by people with the same needs. It is
slower initially, but eventually much more efficient, to do
configurations from scratch rather than trying to un-configure a tightly
put together system that is not suited to my needs.
The most long-established user base for linux is in the server world -
hence the very strict definition of what is 'stable' in distribution
systems such as Debian, which for my purposes tends to equate with 'out
of date'. Most of the time I don't need my machines to be as reliable or
secure as a webserver or database server needs to be, I've found
'unstable' more to my needs. Luckily I am not alone - currently I'm
using Sidux [the Xfce version] as the starting point for my systems, but
there are lots of choices out there.
IMHO asking a distribution to be more flexible at the cost of being
puzzing to the novice is a bit unfair if the principle aims of that
distribution are to give an unambitious user a complete 'it just works'
solution to their most common needs.
It is easy to have a machine dual-bootable and use one distribution for
home/office use and another for specialist purposes if required.
Simon
7:39 a.m.
Raffaele Morelli wrote:
As someone said, Ubuntu is debian sid/unstable with
lipstick.
exactly - if their choice of lipstick suits your needs use it, enjoy it,
but if you need to get out the heavy-duty makeup remover before you can
set it up to work the way you want then maybe the lipstick isn't such a
good idea for you.
Also, though it is Sid based it does have quite a lot of additions and
alterations to make it work the way it does, it is heavily
pre-configured and is based on a snapshot of Sid at some point in the
past. If that snapshot isn't the right one for your hardware, or your
particular needs, then you need to wait till the next release and hope
it will work better for you. Using Sid it may be better to be able to
keep up to date on a much more regular basis - especially if you make
sure you have the ability to go back when a step does not work out for you.
Simon
6042
days inactive
6043
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
7 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Asmo Koskinen -
Beepo / Vanguard -
Dave Phillips -
Geoff King -
Raffaele Morelli -
Simon Wise