Re: [LAD] [Jack-Devel] jackd/jackdbus : D-Bus or not D-Bus...

On Tue, May 19, 2009 10:32, Stéphane Letz wrote:
>>
>> (there are two 5)'s above but i'll refer to the first one)
>>
>>
>> i vote for the 5) auto-start strategy. user selects which one he/she
>> prefers. the default should be "classic" and i would add fallback to
>> "d-bus" and/or "osc" whatever. i still fail to see the problem of
>> honoring .jackdrc if it exists on your home directory. ie. if .jackdrc
>> exists then do the "classic" auto-start; if not, check d-bus service;
>> etc.
>>
>> byee --
>> rncbc aka Rui Nuno Capela rncbc@email-addr-hidden
>
>
> But since some applications like Qjackctl or Ardour write this
> ".jackdrc" file in a possible hidden way for the average user, then
> the system possibly goes back in the "classic" auto-start strategy,
> without any knowledge of that.
>

qjackctl can already opt to not write any .jackdrc. ardour may vary. i
would assume it to use the jack control api in a near future. the same
would apply to qjackctl. then everybody will be happy again ;)

i was asking for a default strategy, call it "auto", which will try
"classic" first, then "d-bus", then whatever.

the main question, at least in my mind, is all about *which* settings will
be used to auto-start the server, isn't it? an explicit command line, as
in "classic", should *always* take precedence over the settings in any
internal configuration database, which i think the "d-bus" honors instead
and that latter behavior is being the root of all "d-bus" evil. scnrt ;)

cheers

-- 
rncbc aka Rui Nuno Capela
rncbc@email-addr-hidden
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev