On Wed, May 29, 2013, at 09:12 AM, Kaj Ailomaa wrote: > Has there been a discussion on what would be the best approach for > packaging jack? > > I find that there sometimes is a problem where users wind up having both > jackd and jackdbus running simultaniously. Is there any good reason for > that to be able to happen? > > Or should jack2 be packaged into two separate binary packages that > conflict with each other - jackd and jackdbus? > > What would the implications be for various jack applications? Is > jackdbus universally supported? Is jackd universally supported? >
Does anyone have any opinions on this? I'd like to go ahead and change this in packaging, making jackdbus and jackd separate for jack2. Also, make jackdbus conflict with jackd. But, that is only if there are no bad implications from doing this, and I currently know of none. _______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
