Re: [Jack-Devel] jackd1/jackd2: FFADO port name divergence

On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 06:52:28PM -0500, Paul Davis wrote:

> > If it doesn't fail to connect it has connected to some arbitray ports.
> 
> not arbitrary. it connected to the ports with the same canonical name
> as last time.
> 
> which is what an overwhelming majority of JACK users need and want.

"All problems in computer science can be solved by another level of
indirection."

For sessions to load, you want some stable names.

Without having seen LADISH, I guess it does the right thing and provide
an intermediate abstraction, some stable bus name that's then connected
to the actual hardware. Both flexible and functional.

The same can be achieved if users rename their physical ports so they
match the "bus name". That said, "system:capture_22" is evil,
"Micstasy_3" isn't.

Pretty names will never solve this. It's eye candy, some really need to
move ports around. Some don't.

The good thing is: everything is already there. Both jackd
implementations allow to rename the system ports. That's maybe what
LADISH does, that's clearly what my port renamer does.

It provides the eye candy and it allows to move ports around. If it
breaks my session because I forgot to provide a bus/name I rely on
before loading? My bad.


I hence agree with Nedko that the jack core can be lean. Maybe unlimited
aliases or pretty names would be nice, but some really don't want
system:capture_56 in the session file. They then say good bye to
"canonical port names".



Cheers

-- 
mail: [hidden]  	http://adi.thur.de	PGP/GPG: key via keyserver

1327573698.18947_0.ltw:2,a <20120126102801.GW17881 at ltw dot loris dot tv>