On Sunday 01 November 2009 07:43:14 Rui Nuno Capela wrote:
> what doesn't make sense, to me at least, is having two (or more)
> qjackctl instances running against the _same_ jack server. if you do
> that, it will be just a waste of resources and prone to confusion and
> race conditions that you should avoid at all times. again, the single
> instance restriction is just to enforce that wasteful and redundant
> scenario won't happen easily.
Rui, here is one example of why you might want such a thing to be possible.
Say I am at work, I start up qjackctl and start jack. I go home. From home I
find I have a need to check something, make some changes, whatever to the
machine at work. I ssh -X in and run qjackctl. The one I left running at work
is still running, but I want the new one to connect to the same jack that is
running at work so that I can do what I need from home. Granted, there may be
issues as to which config trumps which on exit but at least I can make the
changes I need. I guess the other option would be to kill the current
qjackctl at work before kicking off the one over the tunnel. Thoughts?
all the best,
drew
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Received on Sun Nov 1 16:15:03 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Nov 01 2009 - 16:15:04 EET