Re: [Jack-Devel] ladish + jack autoconnect

Hi Nedko,

I'm glad you chimed in.

On 12/25/2011 12:22 AM, Nedko Arnaudov wrote:
> Robin Gareus <[hidden]> writes:
[..]

> I'd like to implement new jack1 server option (exposed in jackd too) with
> value that defaults to current behaviour. The option (kind of enum) has
> four other possible values. In total:
> 
>  * dont restrict self connect attempts (default)
>  * ignore (dont fail, nop) all self-connect requests
>  * fail all self-connect requests
>  * ignore self connect requests to other clients only
>  * fail self connect requests to other clients only
> 
> If something in my proposal is not clear, please let me know. I'll try
> to clarify it.

That clarified a lot regarding the state of ladi. Thanks!

As for adding this option to vanilla JACK. I'm rather skeptical. I think
this rather works around client-bugs or problems that should be fixed in
the respective clients.

Too many options make trouble-shooting issue with JACK a pain.

My first reaction is that this proposal does not add anything to jack
and thus is not relevant in the core. But I did not give it too much
thought. Is there a good use-case - except for working around b0rked apps?

OTOH I did not investigate how many jack-clients would be affected and
how much it'd improve usability in the real-world with potentially lots
of messy clients.


>> On that note: is ladish/laditools compatible with qjactctl these days?
> 
>> The OP mentioned that he starts jackd via qjackctl and and last time I
>> checked, that was incompatible with ladish. Is that still true? Can they
>> co-exist or inter-operate?
> 
> No two sesion handlers/managers (pyjacksm/qjackctl/lash/ladish) are
> known to interoperate. Do you see point of doing go so? If so, how? 

No.

> Or maybe you used "compatible" in some other meaning?

Primarily I wanted to confirm if someone starting jackd (compiled w/ladi
patches) via qjackctl would experience the /self-connect/ problems that
were described in the original "alsa_in problems" thread.

..and then pondered wider ramifications:

It may well be that distributors allow users to install multiple
jack-session handlers/managers along with one of the (3,4? [2])
available implementations or configurations of jackd. The user can
choose at run-time which of the session managers to start/use and
potentially start/stop more than one.

> A user tutorial [1] I saw few days ago suggests that it is possible to
> start qjackctl from gladish, for configuring jackdbus. Usually ladiconf
> is used instead but ladish-1 allows custom jackdbus configuration tool
> to be used.
> 
> [1] http://linuxhomerecording.blogspot.com/2011/12/ladi-session-handler.html

Thanks,  tl;dr - I'll leave the tab open for tomorrow.

good night,
robin

[2] jack1, jack2, jack1+dus, jackd2+dbus+ladi,...?

1324770915.14725_0.ltw:2,a <4EF66647.8060508 at gareus dot org>