Adrian Knoth wrote:
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 08:17:45AM -0500, Eric Dantan Rzewnicki wrote:
I was wondering. We will have jack1 and jack2 in future right?
No. We have jackd1 in unstable and jackd2 in experimental right now.
When there is consensus that jackd2 is good enough, we make it the
default and the other package would just go away.
Both packages are named jackd (and jack-audio-connection-kit), only the
We're not going to change this, so the user won't have a choice what he
wants to install. When jackd2 is good, it's good for everyone and
consequently, there's no use in going back to jackd1.
This whole jackd1/jackd2 thing is a mess. Upstream should drop one of
them, probably jackd1.
But I'm already happy that they've managed to reduce the number of
different netjack implementations. ;)
If I understand correctly upstream doesn't recommend having them
installed in parallel.
Even more: parallel installation of any two jackd versions is
discouraged, no matter if jackd1+jackd2 or something like jack-0.116 and
And they are right, jackd is not the holy grail, it's simply an
inter-application routing framework. It either works or it is broken. No
use in having different versions, as they all provide the same feature
set, the same command line options and so on.
The real difference between jackd1 and jackd2 is SMP support in jackd2,
where jackd1 doesn't optimize processing of independent signal subgraphs
for different CPU cores. This makes jackd2 preferable.
There's still some work to be done. Up until now, jackd2 doesn't ship a
single manpage. We ship some old manpages in our jackd2 package, but we
surely need to update. And they are just copied from the jackd1 source,
so upstream doesn't even care about manpages at the moment.
Did you discuss this with the JACK developers? Cause it's such a main app.
Shouln't we change the name jackd to jack2 slowly? It is confusing when
an app has an name jack2 but is called jackd....
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list