james morris wrote: > On 24/6/2009, "Patrick Shirkey" <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> It would be helpful if things that could make a big impact will >> continued to be discussed within the LAD community. However this is a >> difficult situation. No matter if the discussions are starting prior to >> implementation or post implementation the general direction of the >> arguments tend to be quite emotional. >> >> Is it just because audio guys have a bit more artistic temperament than >> most other developers? >> > > I don't think this adds much to what has been stated by Fons and others, > but perhaps it explains a little? > > I'm not a hardcore audio developer like most of the guys here, but I've > been making audio/music/noise, and coding, since the days of 486sx25s > and windows 3.1. Back then, and for many years after, it was a real > concern to be able to disable as many irrelevant (to audio) processes in > the system as possible (as I'm sure you're aware). > > Now I have a pretty capable system, but when I want to run RT audio apps > I still want to disable as many irrelevant processes on the system as I > can. > > For this reason I really dislike the big monolithic desktop environments. > There are several applications tied into them (some serious, plain > useful, or just fun) which I'd love to have working but which force me > to install all sorts of software I really don't want or need - along > with all sorts of processes running in the background. > > So it feels a bit freedom eroding. The choice seems to be between a > system which 'just works' but which wastes system resources on things > I don't want, or a system which I have to spend hours setting up, > constantly have to deal with the idiosyncrasies of, but which is as fast > and powerful as it could be. > > The notions of old, to raise the potential for system resources to be > only used for the job at hand (ie audio) are still strongly rooted and > people don't like it when they feel their freedom to use systems in > this way is threatened by forcing them to install software and have > running processes they don't want. > > James.
I guess (if needed) separating rt and bread-and-butter Linux by having a dual-boot is an acceptable solution. A user with nearly no knowledge could install a comfortable distro for the everyday desktop environment and another for real-time usage. Even if somebody don't have any trouble with his Linux install, he might wish to have a safe Linux for productions and another Linux to have fun and fun sometimes means to risk things, you won't risk for a installation that needs to be stable all the time, that's why a dual-boot has also an advantage, if there will be a joint venture for distro/ desktop developers and rt hardliners. I have a bad mobo and for rt e.g. I need to set irq priority for especially the one port where the MIDI is connected to. I don't think things like that should be done by the desktop environment. This seems to be impossible. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
