On Tue, 2008-02-05 at 09:32 +0100, Arnold Krille wrote: > Am Montag, 4. Februar 2008 schrieb Bob Ham: > > On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 18:18 +0200, Juuso Alasuutari wrote: > > > Fons Adriaensen wrote: > > > > I fail the see the advantage of D-Bus over e.g. OSC via UDP or TCP. > > > The core issue is abstracting the interfaces involved. As long as it > > > serves to free LASH from being a libjack client > > Why is freeing LASH from being a libjack client a goal?
> as more and more users have not only one session per computer but both > multiple sessions per computer and multiple computers per session, that is > another reason to part lash from jack-as-a-dependency Why is LASH being a JACK client a problem if there are multiple sessions? Similarly, why is LASH being a JACK client a problem if there are multiple hosts? Bob -- Bob Ham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
