[Jack-Devel] mismatch between Mageia 2 (1.9.8) and TinyCore (1.9.7)

PrevNext  Index
DateTue, 18 Dec 2012 11:50:52 -0800
From Robert M. Riches Jr. <[hidden] at jacob21819 dot net>
To[hidden] at lists dot jackaudio dot org
Follow-UpPaul Davis Re: [Jack-Devel] mismatch between Mageia 2 (1.9.8) and TinyCore (1.9.7)
Seeking some answers to try to get something working for my
homegrown Linux zero/thin client setup.  The server was
Mageia 1 with JACK 1.9.6, the clients were Tiny Core Linux
remastered for PXE boot, with Jack 1.9.7.  Sound and life
were good.  With Mageia 1 support now terminated, I had to
switch the server to Mageia 2, which comes with JACK 1.9.8.
There's no 1.9.8 or 1.9.9 available for Tiny Core.

With server running 1.9.8 and clients running 1.9.7, the logs
filled with error messages that the two were using different
protocol versions.  Google found that the protocol had changed
between 1.9.7 and 1.9.8.  Is there any way to get the two
versions to talk to each other?  Is there a compatibility mode
or option?

A poorly-conceived attempt to copy over some relevent-looking
1.9.8 binaries and libraries from Mageia 2 into the Tiny Core
remastering tree eventually (after including a couple more
libraries, ...) a segmentation fault.  It's not likely that
path would ever yield usable fruit.

Switching the client back to 1.9.7, I reverted the Mageia 2
server to Mageia 1's JACK RPMs, and apparently RPM is happy
that all dependencies are satisfied.  This time, the jackd
processes on both sides stay up, and the logs look more
hopeful.  However, the jack_lsp client won't connect/start.
It yields this (indentation added):

    Cannot open lsp client
    jack_client_open() failed, status = 0x21

An strace of jack_lsp did not yield anything I could
recognize as instructive.  Any suggestions on getting
jack_lsp and jack_connect (to connect the ALSA loopback
soundcard with NetJack) to work?

Also, on a somewhat different topic, I'm getting "500 Internal
Server Error" when I try to look at the Wiki or the bug reports.
Do the relevent people know about that issue?  Or, is that
something wrong on my side (new OS, Firefox, etc.) as well?

Thanks,

Robert Riches
PrevNext  Index

1355860262.1828_0.ltw:2,a <20121218195052.4C2631835EA at one dot localnet>