Subject: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Controlling ardour via serial
From: Paul Barton-Davis (pbd_AT_Op.Net)
Date: Tue Oct 17 2000 - 20:42:21 EEST
>One thing I would like to use ardour for is recording live gigs, and the
>though of lugging a monitor to a gig is not apealing, even an LCD job
>is a bit awkward. However, I can write a initab program that listens for a
>certain string on the serial port, and when it gets it (sent by the
>plamtop app) it can spawn ardour and hand off the serial connection to
>it. It would be easier if ardour could be made to run without X, but I
>guess its not essential.
there is no theoretical difficulty in getting it to work without X. if
i've learnt enough lessons from Quasimodo and Softwerk, it should just
be a case of writing a new UI class that does almost nothing (though
it would take care of your metering idea), changing the makefile
around, and recompiling.
of course, things rarely turn out to be that easy, but thats
definitely the theory of how it should work. from a quick search
through the source code, it would seem to be true that there is no
communication (in the form of code dependence - ie. function calls or
variable use) between any of the core engine files and the UI stuff.
OTOH, just as with "server-quasimodo", you'd have to implement some
kind of command-line language to be able to initiate those things that
you can only use the GUI for right now (e.g. loading a tape
primarily). MMC would do the rest. Oh, and CPU usage would drop
noticeably as well. The meters and the clock consume quite a chunk of
time (which is why there are buttons to turn them off.
--p
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Oct 17 2000 - 21:13:27 EEST