On Tue, 2005-09-06 at 11:10 -0400, Paul Davis wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-09-06 at 09:48 -0400, Lee Revell wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-09-06 at 08:58 -0500, Ben Loftis wrote:
> > > How about a nicer interface to do synchronized I/O ? Currently the docs say,
> > > in effect: "this is really hard .. just use JACK". I like JACK but there are
> > > someinstances where it is not needed.
> >
> > JACK does not add significant overhead. There's really no reason not to
> > use it.
>
> overhead, no. complication and runtime dependencies, yes.
>
> i can easily imagine people building embedded linux audio systems who
> would not want to use JACK, and i think they could very well be right to
> do so.
OK.
So what exactly is meant here by "synchronized I/O"?
Lee
Received on Tue Sep 6 20:15:06 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Sep 06 2005 - 20:15:06 EEST