I'm assuming you meant to post this to the list, Paul. In reply to your comment:
One of the motives behind jack-dbus is that a JACK control application shouldn't have to be RT capable since it's not processing any realtime-sensitive data anyway. From a technical perspective, could libjack be extended with such a non realtime control API? -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [LAD] Summercode 2008: LASH, pt. 3 Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2008 11:33:44 -0500 From: Paul Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: Linux Audio Systems To: Juuso Alasuutari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 18:18 +0200, Juuso Alasuutari wrote: > That being said, I still do favor D-Bus over OSC. The point is that they are both irrelevant in the context of JACK itself. First you need an API in JACK to control what you want to control. Then you need a JACK-aware application that speaks <your preferred protocol>. When it gets <your preferred message> it invokes the <relevant part> of the JACK API. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev