Krzysztof Foltman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Nedko Arnaudov wrote: > >> I'd like to hear what other ppl think about this. It works for me both >> ways. If most ppl like to have two modes merged in one executable just >> to see jackd is running not jackdbus, so be it, I'll merge those changes >> into dbus patch. > > I'm definitely in favour of the merge. The previous solution (old jackd, > new jackdbus) was definitely confusing to me. While I understand the > distinction now, it wasn't obvious at first.
So having jackd behave in orthagonal way is not confusing? Like, jackd process is running, why my apps cannot connect?!?!? -- Nedko Arnaudov <GnuPG KeyID: DE1716B0>
pgpDtnOgR4MDB.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
