[PlanetCCRMA] The JACK Story

[David Ford]

Hi Guys
In the middle of all this technical discussion can I add a plea from 
users of 'older hardware'? I'm running PCCRMA on a 2.6GH single core box 
and an IBM T23 1.13GH laptop, I wouldn't like to find that I can't use 
Jack any more - just as Jack has finally managed to overcome the 
Pulseaudio scourge and we are getting more and more applications with 
Jack connections.

Thanks

David

On 22/11/09 07:58, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 12:37 AM, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
>    
>> On Sat, 2009-11-21 at 23:20 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>>      
>>> On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 10:55 PM, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
>>>        
>>>> On Sat, 2009-11-21 at 22:02 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>>>>          
>>      
>>>>> Would you like to have them parallelly installable? We can achieve
>>>>> parallel installation via "alternatives".
>>>>>            
>>>> I'm not completely sure if that is possible. Keep in mind that all jack
>>>> server and client _libraries_ need to be switched in and out (ie: it is
>>>> not just a matter of switching the jackd binaries.
>>>>
>>>>          
>>> I am confident that we can handle it. Java, as a much bigger suite
>>> with many libraries, does it. We will have to reside the actual
>>> binaries+libraries in certain directories and alternatives will do its
>>> magic with the symlinks.
>>>        
>> Ok, it would be worth trying. Having them both would be good. And the
>> user can choose the default.
>>
>> What is the default default? :-), the last one installed? Sorry, I'm not
>> familiar with the alternatives system.
>>
>>      
> As far as I know, "alternatives" has a priority measure that you
> specify in the %post of your package. I don't know which one should be
> the default. I use both from time to time and I can't decide. I would
> say whichever is more stable.
>
>    
>> The priority I'm talking about is the one jackd runs at so it is
>> internal to jack. I change the default in the source code to match
>> rtirq's tweaked priorities. Jackd does not look for it anywhere, you can
>> change it from the command line or qjackctl but it would be best to have
>> the best choice be automatic for the rt kernel, of course :-)
>>
>>      
> So, what would priority 60 do with Fedora's kernel? Sorry I'm rather
> ignorant with kernel related stuff. I run your jack2 on Fedora's
> kernel quite frequently. Although I haven't done anything other than
> simple 3-4 track recording recently, I didn't have trouble with the
> current setting.
>
>    
>>> (By the way, the current convention is to use that folder rather than
>>> editing limits.conf.)
>>>        
>> Ah, I did not know that. I should change my current package to do that
>> instead of adding to limits.conf (when did this start? fc11?)
>>
>>      
> I think it started with F-11 but I'm not sure. You don't need to do an
> update just for this change. Maybe next time you update the package,
> you can do it this way.
>
>    
>> Thanks for bringing this up! I'm all for jack2 moving to Fedora proper,
>> the trick would be to figure out the jackd rt priority stuff so that it
>> can run under both kernels with no tweaking on the part of the user. No
>> answer to that yet.... :-(
>>
>>      
> Yeah, it would be cool if we can figure out a best way. By the way,
> (maybe I should have said this in the beginning) I don't maintain
> Fedora's jack and I hope the current maintainer will cooperate.
>
> Cheers,
> Orcan
>
> _______________________________________________
> PlanetCCRMA mailing list
> PlanetCCRMA at ccrma.stanford.edu
> http://ccrma-mail.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/planetccrma
>    
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://cm-mail.stanford.edu/pipermail/planetccrma/attachments/20091122/db55ba76/attachment.html>