On Mon, 2010-07-19 at 13:46 -0300, Bernardo Barros wrote: > For this low-level task some engineering would be required? I'm not > this kind of guy who know much about tasks scheduling and priorities > (kernel level) but some people told me that real-time kernels patches > could slow down Fedora and I should not use it. Did those people by any chance provide you with _numbers_ that tell you exactly what part of the kernel is impacted and by how much? (and, who are they?) My guess is probably not. Yes, perhaps the rt patches could affect performance. Maybe. In some subsystems (disk i/o, network come to mind). Maybe by a few %, in some specific situations. I don't think the impact will be something you will notice unless you measure it. But of course, if you do audio work that would benefit from small buffer sizes and low latency, the improvement you will get from the rt patches will offset any impact in overall performance of the workstation (if there is any). -- Fernando > I don't know much > about this or what would be the best fine adjustments to get the best > of the OS for audio. > > Planet-CCRMA did most of the work already very nicely :-) Yes, the > first step would be getting all important packages into Fedora. The > idea would be an OS oriented towards audio and score editing, so the > entire OS including kernel and fine adjustments should be optimized to > audio/low-latencies tasks. > > Important things: > - ALL applications should send audio to JACK > - The main sound synthesis/processing software: SuperCollider and Pd-extended > - Audio plugsin LADSPA, DSSI, LV2 (would be possible to include VST support?) > - some kind of audio plugins packaging / modules ? > - Ardour, Jost and QTractor > > 2010/7/18 Christopher Antila <crantila@xxxxxxxxx>:panels? > > David: > > > > When I reply to lists in Thunderbird, I press the "reply list" button, > > which is automatically placed beside the "reply" button. It might have > > been put there in my Thunderbird by some add-on... who knows. > > > > All: > > > > Fedora's six-month release schedules mean that, in my opinion, the > > community should start planning for a "Music Spin" release with Fedora > > 16 - yes, 16. > > > > The spin would logically be prepared by the Audio Creation SIG, which is > > both very small and already overwhelmed. The SIG's page is located on > > the Fedora Wiki here: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Audio_Creation > > > > The first thing to decide is what a "Music Spin" means, and I'd like to > > suggest that it means more than simply pre-installing music software > > that's available for regular Fedora. In that case, the SIG would be > > spending a lot of time and effort on something that does little more > > than save ten Fedora users ten minutes each. > > > > Here's what I think are the "minimum requirements" for a Music Spin: > > 1.) jack2 running as the default sound server, with PulseAudio connected > > to JACK. > > 2.) PlanetCCRMA's real-time kernel and associated optimizations > > installed by default. > > 3.) An easy and obvious way to install MP3 support - like the way > > openSUSE installs the Flash player automatically, but avoids > > distributing it with the distribution. > > > > These aren't easy things, and the community isn't really robust enough > > to really push out a Music Spin. Targeting a release with Fedora 16 > > would give just over a year to get an alpha release ready. > > > > Maybe I'm way off-base here, and certainly I'm still very new to Fedora > > and the Audio Creation SIG, but a dedicated spin seems like something > > that you can't just sort of do. We'd have to be at the level of these: > > http://spins.fedoraproject.org/ > > > > > > Christopher. > > > > On 07/18/2010 12:01 AM, David Timms wrote: > >> On 18/07/10 12:03, Orcan Ogetbil wrote: > >>> On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 9:41 PM, Bernardo Barros wrote: > >>>> When the Music Spin is comming? Next Fedora release? > >>> > >>> Hmm. Speaking from the Fedora side, I wish I could give a date. With > >>> the current resources, I would say, whenever we have the manpower. > >>> Maybe 3-4 more dedicated packagers later. Anybody feel free to join :) > >> And remember that if you have ever downloaded an application's source > >> code, then managed to build and run it locally, you are already some way > >> toward being a packager ;-) > >> > >> rpm basically solidifies that knowledge into a .spec file to allow > >> repeatable builds, in a way that integrates with the system as a whole. > >> > >> What time frames need to be met for Fedora to be able to have a hosted > >> spin ? > >> > >> Remember that a Music Spin from Fedora can only contain packages already > >> in Fedora, so... > >> - what packages would you like to see on the spin ? > >> - don't forget that we can't package in Fedora non-free, nor patent > >> encumbered code... > >> > >>> PlanetCCRMA side is another story. > >> At the moment, needed for special kernel (although with a quad core 3GHz > >> machine I'm not sure that I really require it ?). > >> > >> Would CCRMA have enough resources for hosting a spin (maybe torrent)? > >> > >> I'm keen to assist in the Fedora side; do we already have some wiki > >> information on what already exists, work done, goals and so forth ? > >> > >> Cheers, David. > >> > >> ps. On most fedora lists, when I hit reply, thunderbird automatically > >> sets me to be replying to the list. But the music list seems to be > >> different: a reply fills in only the person who wrote the original > >> message. Do other people have this problem ? > >> > >> If so, I'd like to hassle the list master to fix it up... > >> _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ music mailing list music@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/music
