Re: [Jack-Devel] A kit of (commandline) standard-tools?
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 11:47:58PM +0200, k wrote:
Hi!
> jack is great stuff, but i think it's missing a set of tools wich
> should be included in mainstream distributions, along with a fixed,
> minimalist but thorough set of options and features to enable easy use
> of jack from the commandline and embedded systems. ...i mean that
> 'unix'-way.
This paragraph makes no sense at all to me. I don't know how you use
jack, but most of the time, it's all via command line tools over here.
You are aware that you can start jackd without qjackctl, right?
And last but not least: if you want to change defaults for your
distribution, why do you talk to upstream? File bug reports against the
distribution instead.
> I thought about this when doing field-recording with arecord
> (alsa-tools standard commandline record tool) piped to the
> flac-commandline-encoder. I know of and i use jack_capture for this
> now, but i really think that tools like this should be included
> officially (so to say: $ apt-get install jack-tools).
I still fail to undestand your point. apt-get install jack-capture
Where's the difference?
> In my oppinion this would also include common tools like jack_connect
> or jack_lsp,
Huu? jack_connect and jack_lsp are part of the jackd package. What's
wrong with that?
> output) and better documentation, for using in scripts. This should
Go ahead and fix the manpage. You have the source, there is an issue
tracker. It's that easy.
> also mean better parse(grep)-able output from iE jack_lsp (whose
> output is somewhat ugly to parse because of the multiple lines of
> output).
The more you write the less I understand.
BTW: Have you noticed that there is bash-completion for jack? It parses
the jack_lsp output. One port per line, could it be easier?
> The templated man-pages of jack_*-tools in my debianbox are
> not very helpful, either.
As above, go and fix it.
Cheers
1319147833.23392_0.ltw:2,a <20111020215646.GN9510 at ltw dot loris dot tv>