On 03/05/2010 02:24 PM, Paul Davis wrote: > On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 8:13 AM, Jeremy <jeremy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 03/05/2010 02:09 PM, Pablo Fernandez wrote: >>> >>> I wonder about the nice value. It is there but commented out. >>> jackaudio.org <http://jackaudio.org> don't even mention it. What is it for? >>> >>> >>> Cheers! Pablo >>> >> Hello Pablo, >> >> It's to 'renice' (prioritise) processes. But since prioritising >> processes with rtprio works better the nice setting is not necessary >> anymore afaik. > > not pick on you jeremy, just wanting to make it more likely that > people find this via google: .... no! renice has NEVER been the right > way to make audio work. the fact that it happens, in a few cases, to > have some beneficial impact has apparently misled some people who > don't understand how this all works. nice and renice have absolutely > nothing to do with making sure that audio plays correctly. the > capability that they represent should not be used for this purpose, > and people who spread around patches to limits.conf that include it > are simply confusing people with an error. > > --p Hello Paul, No problem, I already chose generic wording because I knew nice wasn't necessary, but not exactly why. Now it's all clear. Thanks! Jeremy _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
