On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 12:53:54AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> The part about "without any loss of perfomance" is the big problem. Of
> course the latency increases each time you add an indirection.
It shouldn't. When a Jack client connects to HW ports
provided by the ALSA backend it gets
On Mon, 2009-06-15 at 18:28 +0200, Stefano D'Angelo wrote:
> 2009/6/15 David Robillard :
> > On Sun, 2009-06-14 at 23:44 +0200, Stefano D'Angelo wrote:
> >> 2009/6/13 Jörn Nettingsmeier :
> > [...]
> >> > sorry if this has been discussed before, but i didn't find anything in
> >> > the archives...
On Mon, 15.06.09 11:38, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano (na...@ccrma.stanford.edu) wrote:
>
> [it'd be nice if you keep all the cc'ed original lists in the thread]
>
> On Mon, 2009-06-15 at 19:34 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > On Mon, 15.06.09 10:16, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano (na...@ccrma.stanford.edu
[it'd be nice if you keep all the cc'ed original lists in the thread]
On Mon, 2009-06-15 at 19:34 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Mon, 15.06.09 10:16, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano (na...@ccrma.stanford.edu)
> wrote:
>
> > > Distributions will certainly enable the D-Bus code in JACK if they
> > >
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 9:34 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Mon, 15.06.09 10:16, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano (na...@ccrma.stanford.edu)
> wrote:
>
>> > Distributions will certainly enable the D-Bus code in JACK if they
>> > ship it. So, I have no problem with depending on a dbus'ified jack for
>> >
On Mon, 15.06.09 10:16, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano (na...@ccrma.stanford.edu) wrote:
> > Distributions will certainly enable the D-Bus code in JACK if they
> > ship it. So, I have no problem with depending on a dbus'ified jack for
> > this logic to work.
>
> >From a packagers' (for Fedora/Planet CCR
On Mon, 2009-06-15 at 16:37 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Mon, 15.06.09 15:34, Stéphane Letz (l...@grame.fr) wrote:
>
> >> On Mon, 15.06.09 11:01, Stéphane Letz (l...@grame.fr) wrote:
> >>
> I was just thinking, when jack2 finished initialization it takes a
> name on the session
2009/6/15 David Robillard :
> On Sun, 2009-06-14 at 23:44 +0200, Stefano D'Angelo wrote:
>> 2009/6/13 Jörn Nettingsmeier :
> [...]
>> > sorry if this has been discussed before, but i didn't find anything in
>> > the archives...
>> > consider the case of periodic control values of LADSPA plugins, fo
On Sun, 2009-06-14 at 23:44 +0200, Stefano D'Angelo wrote:
> 2009/6/13 Jörn Nettingsmeier :
[...]
> > sorry if this has been discussed before, but i didn't find anything in
> > the archives...
> > consider the case of periodic control values of LADSPA plugins, for
> > instance the azimuth in a hori
>
>> What I'm personally trying to achieve is a more "flexible" way
>> (compared
>> to what is currently a bit hard-coded in JAKC2 SVN) so that a DBus
>> control component can be coded as a "plugin" to be possibly loaded in
>> JACK server process. This new plugin model allows to keep basically 2
On Mon, 15.06.09 15:34, Stéphane Letz (l...@grame.fr) wrote:
>> On Mon, 15.06.09 11:01, Stéphane Letz (l...@grame.fr) wrote:
>>
I was just thinking, when jack2 finished initialization it takes a
name on the session bus, right?
>>>
>>> Not sure about what you mean by " it takes name on th
Le 15 juin 09 à 14:59, Lennart Poettering a écrit :
> On Mon, 15.06.09 11:01, Stéphane Letz (l...@grame.fr) wrote:
>
>>> I was just thinking, when jack2 finished initialization it takes a
>>> name on the session bus, right?
>>
>> Not sure about what you mean by " it takes name on the session
>>
On Mon, 15.06.09 11:01, Stéphane Letz (l...@grame.fr) wrote:
> > I was just thinking, when jack2 finished initialization it takes a
> > name on the session bus, right?
>
> Not sure about what you mean by " it takes name on the session bus". I
> hope Nedko can answer better here.
I simply mean
On Sun, 14.06.09 23:02, Justin Smith (noisesm...@gmail.com) wrote:
> What about piggybacking pulseaudio on jack as default behavior if jack
> is running (without autoconnect to ports, preferably). You can figure
> that if someone has jack running they can handle doing a manual port
> connect, and
Stefano D'Angelo wrote:
> You do not need "hordes of people", you just need two trying to define
> the same bit differently :-)
In Linux audio, that counts as hordes :)
K.
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://li
2009/6/15 Krzysztof Foltman :
> Stefano D'Angelo wrote:
>
>> Well, I just misread the original post (somehow I thought Jorn wanted
>> to add the hint outside of the LADSPA spec, that would cause lots of
>> problems).
>
> Lots of problems? What sort of?
>
> If you mean hordes of people suddenly star
Le 15 juin 09 à 01:14, Lennart Poettering a écrit :
> Hmm,
>
> I was just thinking, when jack2 finished initialization it takes a
> name on the session bus, right?
Not sure about what you mean by " it takes name on the session bus". I
hope Nedko can answer better here.
What is implemented rig
Stefano D'Angelo wrote:
> Well, I just misread the original post (somehow I thought Jorn wanted
> to add the hint outside of the LADSPA spec, that would cause lots of
> problems).
Lots of problems? What sort of?
If you mean hordes of people suddenly starting to define their own
proprietary undoc
2009/6/15 Krzysztof Foltman :
> Stefano D'Angelo wrote:
>>>
>>> Since it's useful, doesn't break anything, and trivially
>>> easy, there is no reason for not adding such a bit.
>>>
>>
>> If it is added to the next version LADSPA itself, then it's fine,
>> otherwise anyone could think like that an
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Justin Smith wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 11:27 PM, alex stone wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 10:02 AM, Justin Smith wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 3:53 PM, Lennart Poettering
>>> wrote:
On Mon, 15.06.09 00:01, Fons Adriaensen (f...@kokkinizita.net
20 matches
Mail list logo
