Re: [LAU] Ardour: exporting woes

On Thu, 24 Mar 2016, jonetsu@email-addr-hidden wrote:

> On Wed, 23 Mar 2016 17:51:27 -0500
> "Chris Caudle" <chris@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
>
>> Paul applied this patch recently in preparation for a new jack1
>> release:
>
> I was under the impression that jackd2 was 'the Jack' as Linux Mint
> runs 1.9.9.5 while nevertheless having - for all practical purposes -
> an empty jackd package (version 5). Will there be yet another jack
> series, of a jack1 type, in the near future ?

:) Debian based distros (Ubuntu follows Debian) always pick the highest
version number by default unless the package maintainer can note a bug in
the higher version. Debian packaging also makes some other mistakes with
Jackd packaging (IMO) in that they do not include the -dev part of the
package in this case and do not call the jackd1 packages in a consistant
manner. For example there is a jackd package that installs jackd2 and it's
libs... so having installed jackd, one would assume that libjackd-dev
would be the correct install for building things that need jackd's
includes. But all jackd2 packages (except jackd itself) are called
packagename-jackd2*. So we have libjack-jackd2-0 and libjack0 instead of
libjack-jackd1-0.

There is no reason jackd1 can not work with pulseaudio. There is a dbus
patch available that I am sure would have become part of the debian jack
package if jack1 had been chosen.

Having said all this. I personally wonder (yes I invite comments) about
the future of jackd (both 1 and 2). All our software is pushed by personal
itch and it seems to me that there is little if any personal itch left in
the jackd development camp. Plugins and internal routing are making jackd
less useful in some cases... but there is still a lot of SW that depends
on jack for it's use.

--
Len Ovens
www.ovenwerks.net
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user