On Thu, 24 Mar 2016 08:02:46 -0400, jonetsu@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >On Wed, 23 Mar 2016 17:51:27 -0500 >"Chris Caudle" <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Paul applied this patch recently in preparation for a new jack1 >> release: > >I was under the impression that jackd2 was 'the Jack' as Linux Mint >runs 1.9.9.5 while nevertheless having - for all practical purposes - >an empty jackd package (version 5). Will there be yet another jack >series, of a jack1 type, in the near future ? On Debian/Ubuntu applications such as Ardour have a dependency to the the package "jackd" and the package "jackd" requires to install the package "jackd1" or "jackd2". "jackd1" is older than "jackd2", so it's nothing new. Here is an overview of the differences between jack1 and jack2: https://github.com/jackaudio/jackaudio.github.com/wiki/Q_difference_jack1_jack2 News about latest innovations and development status could be find by recent posts to http://lists.jackaudio.org/listinfo.cgi/jack-devel-jackaudio.org , unfortunately reading the archive requires to subscribe. For jack1 it starts here: http://lists.jackaudio.org/private.cgi/jack-devel-jackaudio.org/2016-January/000216.html For jack2 it starts here: http://lists.jackaudio.org/private.cgi/jack-devel-jackaudio.org/2016-March/000385.html It's important to read the follow-ups to avoid misunderstandings, especially about the future of jack1. The reason for several jack2 users likely is this one: http://lists.jackaudio.org/private.cgi/jack-devel-jackaudio.org/2016-February/000268.html One reason why I'm using jack2: http://lists.jackaudio.org/private.cgi/jack-devel-jackaudio.org/2016-February/000276.html However, regarding this issue I likely likely could use jack1 too: http://lists.jackaudio.org/private.cgi/jack-devel-jackaudio.org/2016-February/000282.html Regards, Ralf _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
