Gustin Johnson wrote: > I would also recommend avoiding moving targets like the Ubuntu releases. > Too much can change between each release and 6 months is not a lot of > time to stay on top of them all. Ubuntu 8.10 and 9.04 in particular > have been challenging. >
To say the least. ;) I agree completely. When I started using Ubuntu I didn't understand the whole LTS thing, but now I think it's a pretty good way to establish a solid base system. >> Two especially annoying details that might be handled by the distro >> installer and its configuration tools: The entries in >> /etc/security/limits.conf and the creation of an audio group with the >> user included. I don't see why the user has to take these steps, they're >> the same for every installation, so why not automate them ? >> >> > I believe that this has now been corrected with the Ubuntu Studio > Controls package. This is one area where Ubuntu Studio at least has > someone working on it. > > I wouldn't say it's corrected. Have you seen this control panel ? It's not really an improvement on adding the info manually to limits.conf. There are check boxes for memlock, raw 1394 access, nice value, and X restart shortcut. There's no Help to let users know what any of that means, nor are there any meaningful default values. I say again, since the JACK devs clearly indicate preferred values for those settings then I suggest that those values be used as defaults. And automated. And is there some good reason the audio group shouldn't get created by an audio-optimized distro during its installation or configuration stages ? >> I have more to say about things like Pulseaudio, insufficient support >> for the touchpad, HAL polling, and other annoyances, but you'll have to >> wait. Or you can try installing Jaunty like I did to see which of my >> troubles occur for you. >> > > I am still using Intrepid on my laptop. I will be moving to Jaunty > within a couple of weeks. I am interested to see if I have the same > problems. Despite what many said, 8.10 was fine for low latency audio, > as long as you replaced the Ubuntu kernel. > > Agreed. But it was/is one big PITA to get it there. >> Basically, anything that is going to be configured identically across >> all installations should be taken out of the user's concerns. For >> example, I can't figure why Pulseaudio is installed as the primary sound >> server in an audio production system. If it is included there ought to >> be a 1-click solution for disabling it, but at this time a rather >> lengthy series of hoops must be negotiated. And on and on and on it >> goes, one annoyance after another. >> > > I have been following this particular issue rather closely. The problem > is that pulseaudio is part of the ubuntu-desktop meta package. Removing > it causes a lot of problems and means that Ubuntu Studio moves even > further from a stock Ubuntu install. In and of itself this is not > necessarily a bad thing, but the Ubuntu Studio guys have some serious > manpower issues right now. This is a lot of work for an already > stretched team. More than anything, they need people to contribute to > the project. > > The more I think about it the more I feel the need to see mission statements from the distro maintainers. If a specialized distro says it's intended for audio production then I'll expect certain amenities and configurations that will be of little or no use (and probably problematic) to someone not planning on using the system for its stated purpose. > Unlike in the commercial realm, the number of users does not indicate > success, the number of active contributors is what matters. Ubuntu > Studio has the problem of trying to please a large number of users > unwilling to actually pitch in. > > I'll look into that situation. Alas, posting to the Ubuntu forums feels like I'm whistling in a hurricane. It's obvious that Ubuntu is extremely popular, and for good reasons, but that popularity is definitely a double-edged blade. I try to make allowances for that in my posts, I know the devs are over-burdened, and I don't want offer up criticism that isn't constructive. OTOH my own time is already over-stretched, I just don't have any more to give to another project. I'll help as I'm able, which I'm sorry to say just isn't enough. > A lot of the technical problems with Ubuntu Studio are upstream. They > need to do a lot of work to bend Ubuntu into an appropriate low latency > workstation. For a stable DAW it makes sense to me to stick to the LTS > releases. I consider all other Ubuntu releases to be more like betas or > release candidates. The 6 month release schedule also makes it more > difficult to keep on top of the new changes. > It's apparently hard for the Ubuntu devs themselves. Some of the problems I've faced in Jaunty were repeats of problems encountered in Intrepid, with brand-new solutions (which weren't necessarily fun to look for). Anyway, I agree re: the LTS releases. Now that I have it behaving nicely I think Jaunty + Ubuntu Studio is a sweet system, but I spent too much time slapping it into shape. Best, dp _______________________________________________ 64studio-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.64studio.com/mailman/listinfo/64studio-users
