linuxaudio.org

[it'd be nice if you keep all the cc'ed original lists in the thread]
On Mon, 2009-06-15 at 19:34 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:

quoted text
> On Mon, 15.06.09 10:16, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano (nando@ccrma.Stanford.EDU) wrote:

>

> > > Distributions will certainly enable the D-Bus code in JACK if they

> > > ship it. So, I have no problem with depending on a dbus'ified jack for

> > > this logic to work.

> >

> > >From a packagers' (for Fedora/Planet CCRMA) point of view the future

> > dbus-capable jack should be able to be used without dbus support as well

> > as with it _without_ having to recompile it (that is without having to

> > repackage it differently). For an example of non-dbus usage, I may want

> > to start jack on a remote host where there is no desktop session at the

> > moment and thus dbus is not usable.

>

> No. That use case does not make any sense. The D-Bus session bus is

> autospawned if necessary these days.

So, let's say host A is where I am logged in now and I'm running a

desktop. The I start a terminal, just do "slogin B" (for simplicity

let's assume nobody is logged in into B at the time) and then I would

have dbus running there without a desktop? What is taking care of

setting up the dbus session, is that ssh? The login process? 
> I personally see no value in dbus-less builds. That's just pointless

quoted text
> conservatism, mostly based on unfounded anti D-Bus FUD. But then

> again, I am not really a jack developer, so what I think is mostly

> irrelevant.

I understand that you _personally_ would see no value in dbus-less

builds. But others do see value. I am assuming that others might have

valid reasons for doing things in a different way, and that my view of

the universe is not the only one possible. 
In a very long thread about the dbus issues in the jack developers list

it was (I think) agreed that the core innards of jack would not

explicitly depend on dbus at compile time but rather at runtime. So you

could run jack with dbus support or without it, without having to

recompile it. Everyone is happy. Nothing is forced on anybody. Future

usage will eventually make the non-dbus option go away or not. Nobody is

inconvenienced by that. 
-- Fernando
_______________________________________________

Linux-audio-dev mailing list

Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org

http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev