Hello.
Nowadays the jack project has two branches - old jack (1) branch with version 0.116.2 and new one called jack2 version 1.9.3. I'd like to gather opinions and suggestions about applying new version for F13. Please, share your thoughts! Thank you.
2009/11/5 Andy Shevchenko andy.shevchenko@gmail.com:
Hello.
Nowadays the jack project has two branches - old jack (1) branch with version 0.116.2 and new one called jack2 version 1.9.3. I'd like to gather opinions and suggestions about applying new version for F13. Please, share your thoughts! Thank you.
-- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
The new jack handles device reservation, so it interacts with pulseaudio much better. Waiting for a while already to see it appear atleast in rawhide (now rawhide f13) sometime soon.
kind regards, Rudolf Kastl
On Thu, 2009-11-05 at 15:39 +0100, Rudolf Kastl wrote:
2009/11/5 Andy Shevchenko andy.shevchenko@gmail.com:
Hello.
Nowadays the jack project has two branches - old jack (1) branch with version 0.116.2 and new one called jack2 version 1.9.3. I'd like to gather opinions and suggestions about applying new version for F13. Please, share your thoughts!
The new jack handles device reservation, so it interacts with pulseaudio much better.
(BTW, that seems to work just fine in fc12, jack2 takes and releases the soundcard properly - for < fc12 I was using a wrapper perl script for the same purpose)
Waiting for a while already to see it appear atleast in rawhide (now rawhide f13) sometime soon.
Jack2 can also run jack clients in parallel (ie: at the same time) when the connection graph between applications allows for that. As it spawns multiple threads for that it can use multiple cores if available. Big win in most current computers (but no problem in single core processors either).
Jack2 has been the default in Planet CCRMA for a long time, no major issues I know of. I have been using it myself for my realtime audio performance work.
As Orcan suggests, an alternatives system for jack would be great as it would give choice to users.
It would also be great if we could better coordinate rt priority settings for jack to better interact with rt patched kernels and the rtirq (or equivalent) script, see this post for my try at summarizing current state:
http://ccrma-mail.stanford.edu/pipermail/planetccrma/2009-November/016161.ht...
-- Fernando
On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 9:23 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
Hello.
Nowadays the jack project has two branches - old jack (1) branch with version 0.116.2 and new one called jack2 version 1.9.3. I'd like to gather opinions and suggestions about applying new version for F13. Please, share your thoughts! Thank you.
It would be really good to have jack2. But I'm not sure if we can dump jack1 yet. Mut the upstream doesn't look like they will abandon jack1 soon.
My proposal is to use "alternatives" for parallel installation, the way java does. Then the user can switch between jack1 and jack2 as he wants.
Is it okay with everyone if I write a specfile for jack2 that uses alternatives?
Orcan
On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 11:23 PM, Orcan Ogetbil oget.fedora@gmail.com wrote:
My proposal is to use "alternatives" for parallel installation, the way java does. Then the user can switch between jack1 and jack2 as he wants.
Is it okay with everyone if I write a specfile for jack2 that uses alternatives?
It's ok for me. I can submit review for jack2.
On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 4:03 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 11:23 PM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
My proposal is to use "alternatives" for parallel installation, the way java does. Then the user can switch between jack1 and jack2 as he wants.
Is it okay with everyone if I write a specfile for jack2 that uses alternatives?
It's ok for me. I can submit review for jack2.
I made an initial attempt with alternatives. The 2 packages can be simultaneously installed now. Still there are problems we need to overcome. If anyone wants to follow or contribute to the discussion, please add yourself to the CC at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=542288
Thanks!
Orcan
On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 04:23:23PM -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 9:23 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
Hello.
Nowadays the jack project has two branches - old jack (1) branch with version 0.116.2 and new one called jack2 version 1.9.3. I'd like to gather opinions and suggestions about applying new version for F13. Please, share your thoughts! Thank you.
It would be really good to have jack2. But I'm not sure if we can dump jack1 yet. Mut the upstream doesn't look like they will abandon jack1 soon.
My proposal is to use "alternatives" for parallel installation, the way java does. Then the user can switch between jack1 and jack2 as he wants.
Is it okay with everyone if I write a specfile for jack2 that uses alternatives?
alternatives sounds like the wrong technology to use here. If jack is being invoked by the user for their session and different users can choose to use jack or jack2 or pulseaudio or another sound server then you should be looking at environment-modules instead:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/EnvironmentModules
-Toshio
On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 5:23 PM, Andy Shevchenko andy.shevchenko@gmail.com wrote:
Hello.
Nowadays the jack project has two branches - old jack (1) branch with version 0.116.2 and new one called jack2 version 1.9.3. I'd like to gather opinions and suggestions about applying new version for F13. Please, share your thoughts! Thank you.
Recently I have received following letters:
---------- message ---------- From: Adrian Knoth adi@drcomp.erfurt.thur.de Date: Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 2:55 PM Subject: Coordinated jackd upgrade To: andy.shevchenko@gmail.com
Hi Andy!
I'm the Debian maintainer for jackd, ardour, ffado, qjackctl and some more packages related to pro-audio.
After a long discussion, the Debian Multimedia Team decided to switch to jackd2 in squeeze, our upcoming release.
We already coordinated with Ubuntu, they'll also switch ASAP, though it's too late for their soon to be released Lucid.
We also contacted Opensuse (yesterday, answer pending), and now Fedora. The idea is to have all major Linux distros using the same jackd version, so users don't experience different levels of functionality depending on the distro they use, non-applicable recipes from the Internet, missing features and so on.
The rationale for our switch to jackd2:
* ABI-compatible drop-in replacement for jackd1, so no need to change or recompile any application
* SMP support. jackd1 can only use one processor/core
* soundcard reservation. jackd2 can talk to pulseaudio via DBUS to acquire the soundcard, so no need to manually shutdown or rip off PA when a user wants to start jackd.
* support for ladish session manager (http://ladish.org)
In general: more features, more everything. The Fedora-derived pro-audio CCRMA distro uses jackd2, the Gentoo pro-audio overlay uses jackd2, Ubuntu-Studio64 uses it and so on and so on...
We have our jackd2 package almost ready, so if you like, we can send you a tarball if this helps.
How do you feel about this coordinated approach?
Cheerio
---------- message ---------- From: Adrian Knoth adi@drcomp.erfurt.thur.de Date: Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 4:16 PM Subject: Re: Coordinated jackd upgrade To: Andy Shevchenko andy.shevchenko@gmail.com
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 03:02:08PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
Hi!
Hi Andy!
Because this is private message I would like to ask about possibility to forward this mail to the fedora-devel@ mailing list.
Of course, feel free to forward and if need be CC me, just in case you want me to reply to something... this also holds true for this mail.
I see you've been discussing the very same problems. ;) Here are some decisions we made:
* only one package, that is, we ship jackd2, not jackd1+jackd2. There's no need for two packages, jackd1<->jackd2 are drop-in replacements to each other. Consequently, we avoid virtual packages.
* Realtime permissions: our jackd package creates the file /etc/security/limits.d/audio.conf with the following content:
@audio - rtprio 95 @audio - memlock unlimited
The jackd2 package is missing manpages. For a start, we'll simply copy them from jackd1, but let me talk to upstream. This needs to be solved in jackd2 anyway.
On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 12:02 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 5:23 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
Hello.
Nowadays the jack project has two branches - old jack (1) branch with version 0.116.2 and new one called jack2 version 1.9.3. I'd like to gather opinions and suggestions about applying new version for F13. Please, share your thoughts! Thank you.
Recently I have received following letters:
---------- message ---------- From: Adrian Knoth Date: Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 2:55 PM Subject: Coordinated jackd upgrade To: andy.shevchenko
Hi Andy!
I'm the Debian maintainer for jackd, ardour, ffado, qjackctl and some more packages related to pro-audio.
After a long discussion, the Debian Multimedia Team decided to switch to jackd2 in squeeze, our upcoming release.
We already coordinated with Ubuntu, they'll also switch ASAP, though it's too late for their soon to be released Lucid.
We also contacted Opensuse (yesterday, answer pending), and now Fedora. The idea is to have all major Linux distros using the same jackd version, so users don't experience different levels of functionality depending on the distro they use, non-applicable recipes from the Internet, missing features and so on.
The rationale for our switch to jackd2:
* ABI-compatible drop-in replacement for jackd1, so no need to change or recompile any application
* SMP support. jackd1 can only use one processor/core
* soundcard reservation. jackd2 can talk to pulseaudio via DBUS to acquire the soundcard, so no need to manually shutdown or rip off PA when a user wants to start jackd.
* support for ladish session manager (http://ladish.org)
In general: more features, more everything. The Fedora-derived pro-audio CCRMA distro uses jackd2, the Gentoo pro-audio overlay uses jackd2, Ubuntu-Studio64 uses it and so on and so on...
We have our jackd2 package almost ready, so if you like, we can send you a tarball if this helps.
How do you feel about this coordinated approach?
Cheerio
---------- message ---------- From: Adrian Knoth Date: Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 4:16 PM Subject: Re: Coordinated jackd upgrade To: Andy Shevchenko
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 03:02:08PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
Hi!
Hi Andy!
Because this is private message I would like to ask about possibility to forward this mail to the fedora-devel@ mailing list.
Of course, feel free to forward and if need be CC me, just in case you want me to reply to something... this also holds true for this mail.
I see you've been discussing the very same problems. ;) Here are some decisions we made:
* only one package, that is, we ship jackd2, not jackd1+jackd2. There's no need for two packages, jackd1<->jackd2 are drop-in replacements to each other. Consequently, we avoid virtual packages.
* Realtime permissions: our jackd package creates the file /etc/security/limits.d/audio.conf with the following content:
@audio - rtprio 95 @audio - memlock unlimited
The jackd2 package is missing manpages. For a start, we'll simply copy them from jackd1, but let me talk to upstream. This needs to be solved in jackd2 anyway.
I don't object the change. Let us ask the CCRMA folks to get their opinions.
Orcan
On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 3:35 PM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 5:23 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
Hello.
Nowadays the jack project has two branches - old jack (1) branch with version 0.116.2 and new one called jack2 version 1.9.3. I'd like to gather opinions and suggestions about applying new version for F13. Please, share your thoughts! Thank you.
I don't object the change. Let us ask the CCRMA folks to get their opinions.
The update was discussed in CCRMA list and we got no objections in the last 3 weeks.
For F-13 it may be a little late. So shall we make this an F-14 target?
Orcan
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 6:17 PM, Orcan Ogetbil oget.fedora@gmail.com wrote:
For F-13 it may be a little late. So shall we make this an F-14 target?
I see new commit to the koji. Thanks for working on jack2, but the question is why the package name is jack-audio-connection-kit? As far as I know the package name should be derived from the main tarball name.
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 2:30 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 6:17 PM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
For F-13 it may be a little late. So shall we make this an F-14 target?
I see new commit to the koji. Thanks for working on jack2, but the
No problem. Although I was the one collecting the pieces, it was rather a collective work. Thanks to everyone who is involved. We need to do some testing now, and clean up the glitches before F-14.
question is why the package name is jack-audio-connection-kit? As far as I know the package name should be derived from the main tarball name.
I thought about doing that once. Jack1's and jack2's source codes are distributed on the same website [1], We know that JACK stands for Jack-Audio-Connection-Kit. So there shouldn't be any confusion.
Sadly, there is no unique agreement on the package name across distribution. As far as I know, we were the only distro distributing jack1 under the full name "jack-audio-connection-kit". There is also a very different project called jack [2], although we don't have it on Fedora. This adds more to the subtlety as Mandriva distributes this jack as just "jack".
What do other maintainers think?
Orcan
[1] http://jackaudio.org/download [2] http://www.home.unix-ag.org/arne/jack/
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 5:04 PM, Orcan Ogetbil oget.fedora@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 2:30 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
question is why the package name is jack-audio-connection-kit? As far as I know the package name should be derived from the main tarball name.
I thought about doing that once. Jack1's and jack2's source codes are distributed on the same website [1], We know that JACK stands for Jack-Audio-Connection-Kit. So there shouldn't be any confusion.
There is rule in Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines#General_Naming
In our case it's a bit odd. However, I vote to call package in the same way as main tarball.
On Tue, 2010-07-20 at 10:04 -0400, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 2:30 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 6:17 PM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
For F-13 it may be a little late. So shall we make this an F-14 target?
I see new commit to the koji. Thanks for working on jack2, but the
No problem. Although I was the one collecting the pieces, it was rather a collective work. Thanks to everyone who is involved. We need to do some testing now, and clean up the glitches before F-14.
question is why the package name is jack-audio-connection-kit? As far as I know the package name should be derived from the main tarball name.
I thought about doing that once. Jack1's and jack2's source codes are distributed on the same website [1], We know that JACK stands for Jack-Audio-Connection-Kit. So there shouldn't be any confusion.
Sadly, there is no unique agreement on the package name across distribution. As far as I know, we were the only distro distributing jack1 under the full name "jack-audio-connection-kit". There is also a very different project called jack [2], although we don't have it on Fedora. This adds more to the subtlety as Mandriva distributes this jack as just "jack".
What do other maintainers think?
"jack-audio-connection-kit" is the official name of the project and it has been the suggested name for packages - I could try to dig through my very old email and find an email from Paul on the subject. I have used that name since 2001 or so (version 0.37) - I may have been one of the first if not the first to package Jack as part of Planet CCRMA.
The jack1 tarball is actually named "jack-audio-connection-kit", not "jack". As mentioned above jack2 is a different code base that implements the same "official" jack API and was developed independently. Its developer chose to name the tarball jack (I don't know why, we could ask).
Who knows what the future could bring. I certainly don't know :-) When/if jack2 becomes the official jack maybe the tarball will change to jack-audio-connection-kit. Of jack1 could evolve, supplant the current jack2 as the next version, and the tarball would still be jack-audio-connection-kit. I would keep the current name.
-- Fernando
On 21/07/10 02:54, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
On Tue, 2010-07-20 at 10:04 -0400, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 2:30 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 6:17 PM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
For F-13 it may be a little late. So shall we make this an F-14 target?
I see new commit to the koji. Thanks for working on jack2, but the
No problem. Although I was the one collecting the pieces, it was rather a collective work. Thanks to everyone who is involved. We need to do some testing now, and clean up the glitches before F-14.
question is why the package name is jack-audio-connection-kit? As far as I know the package name should be derived from the main tarball name.
I thought about doing that once. Jack1's and jack2's source codes are distributed on the same website [1], We know that JACK stands for Jack-Audio-Connection-Kit. So there shouldn't be any confusion.
Sadly, there is no unique agreement on the package name across distribution. As far as I know, we were the only distro distributing jack1 under the full name "jack-audio-connection-kit". There is also a very different project called jack [2], although we don't have it on Fedora. This adds more to the subtlety as Mandriva distributes this jack as just "jack".
What do other maintainers think?
"jack-audio-connection-kit" is the official name of the project and it has been the suggested name for packages - I could try to dig through my very old email and find an email from Paul on the subject. I have used that name since 2001 or so (version 0.37) - I may have been one of the first if not the first to package Jack as part of Planet CCRMA.
The jack1 tarball is actually named "jack-audio-connection-kit", not "jack". As mentioned above jack2 is a different code base that implements the same "official" jack API and was developed independently. Its developer chose to name the tarball jack (I don't know why, we could ask).
Who knows what the future could bring. I certainly don't know :-) When/if jack2 becomes the official jack maybe the tarball will change to jack-audio-connection-kit. Of jack1 could evolve, supplant the current jack2 as the next version, and the tarball would still be jack-audio-connection-kit. I would keep the current name.
And in our Fedora world, yum search jack gives you the full name anyway. Also jack is underlying layer; other applications simply require it and hence you never really need to know/type the exact package name.
I sort of think that "jack" has other connotations (eg ac/dc: she's got the jack...)
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
On Tue, 2010-07-20 at 10:04 -0400, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 2:30 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
question is why the package name is jack-audio-connection-kit? As far as I know the package name should be derived from the main tarball name.
I thought about doing that once. Jack1's and jack2's source codes are distributed on the same website [1], We know that JACK stands for Jack-Audio-Connection-Kit. So there shouldn't be any confusion.
"jack-audio-connection-kit" is the official name of the project and it has been the suggested name for packages.
Yes. Therefore I think we are safe from the guidelines' point of view: "When naming a package, the name should match the upstream tarball or project name from which this software came." from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines#General_Naming
Orcan
2010/7/20 Andy Shevchenko andy.shevchenko@gmail.com:
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 6:17 PM, Orcan Ogetbil oget.fedora@gmail.com wrote:
For F-13 it may be a little late. So shall we make this an F-14 target?
I see new commit to the koji. Thanks for working on jack2, but the question is why the package name is jack-audio-connection-kit? As far as I know the package name should be derived from the main tarball name.
-- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko --
Package name jack conflicts with some other opensource softwares, it'll better to persuade jack-audio-connection-kit upstream to avoid of using jack as package name.
FYI, debian use jackd2 as package name for jack-audio-connection-kit 2.
Regards, Chen Lei
devel@lists.stg.fedoraproject.org
-
Andy Shevchenko -
Chen Lei -
Development discussions related to Fedora -
Fernando Lopez-Lezcano -
Orcan Ogetbil -
Rudolf Kastl -
Toshio Kuratomi