[Ardour-Users] The future?

Ralf Mardorf ralf.mardorf at alice-dsl.net
Wed Aug 11 03:53:40 PDT 2010

On Wed, 2010-08-11 at 10:19 +0000, david headon wrote:
> Simon makes a number of good points in this post.
> Ubuntu Studio,

Doesn't work on several machines, my too.

> 64 Studio,

My favourite distro, at the moment not really maintained anymore.
3.0 alpha is stable, but very outdated.
3.3 beta, comme ci, comme ça

You need to compile some common audio apps youself.

Anyway I prefer 64 Studio until now.

> and APODIO
> are all now being based around Ubuntu [ unstable - testing ]
>  repositories.
> I'm using straight Ubuntu with various repos enabled, to allow
> 'non-free' codecs and other attributes necessary for media production.
> I find package management under Ubuntu convenient, but not perfect.
>  As a long time fan of 'straight' Debian, i have enjoyed the
> relatively un-contrived aspect of logging in as 'root' for
> administration.
> It is a bit bothersome to me that i must utilise 'sudo-' for admin
> under Ubuntu, but in recent years, the proliferation of admin scripts
> on the net has made tedious tasks quite painless.

It's no big deal to enable a root account and the howtos are easy to
find by using Google, it's just hard when using other search engines.

> I guess, we gain and lose in equal measure.
> If i were running web/php/sql servers, it would be straight 'stable'
> Debian all the way, 
> whereas, my desktop needs and multimedia work (ie, most of what i need
> to do )
> have benefited from the Ubuntu community  and it's relative merits.
> Ardour/Jack users from the Gentoo or SuSe community, are there any
> advantages to running a system on these platforms?

IMO Suse isn't good, OTOH IIRC Rui does run Suse, but he also compiles a
lot his self. At the moment I'm booted into Suse 11.2. The kernel-rt
from the repositories doesn't work, I need to compile it myself and
after each startup I need to wait 11 seconds and then to push Ctrl + Alt
+ Double-Backspace, before I start a session, but after that it's stable
for JACK audio, while media players that don't use JACK do not have
sound for my GNOME desktop, even when JACK isn't running.

> Mandriva? i am considering 'all comers' for my next multimedia box
>  (building as we speak),
> BUT,   I'd love to keep the initial setup time to a minimum...
> I keep coming back to Ubuntu-
> I'm very keen to hear other ideas and ways of working!
> thanks to Paul and all the members of this list for years of
> fascinating growth and learning.
> I dearly want to fine the optimum system for running Ardour

Did you test AV Linux?

- Ralf

>  so that i can, with total confidence, begin to utilise Jack/Ardour
> commercially  as a production tool for my clients.
> The 'next step' might allow me to contribute financially to the Ardour
> project, and be a 'non-hobbyist' user!
> thanks-
> dav=-0
> ______________________________________________________________________
> From: Simon Wise <simonzwise at gmail.com>
> To: ardour-users at lists.ardour.org
> Sent: Wed, 11 August, 2010 10:25:14
> Subject: Re: [Ardour-Users] Debian?
> On 10/08/10 19:42, christian at shamanbenefit.net wrote:
> > ----- Original Message ----- From: simonzwise at gmail.com To:
> > ardour-users at lists.ardour.org Date: 10.08.2010 12:29:38 Subject: Re:
> > [Ardour-Users] ardour&  "phoning home"
> > 
> >> It is actually easier to install Ardour on Linux than OSX, it is
> maintained
> >> in Debian and probably several other distributions
> > 
> > Well, no, that's just not true. I'm using Debian stable and there is
> *NO*
> > ardour available. Actually, the last version I've seen here was
> 0.99. So, of
> > course, if you use 'testing' or 'unstable' you can get it from apt,
> but using
> > stable, the best possibility is to compile.
> Yes, choosing a distribution to suit your needs is possibly the most
> difficult
> step for a Linux user, especially new ones, and it is always a
> controversial topic among more experienced users. There are lots of
> sensible ways to make the choice.
> As I understand Debian the "Stable" version is directed to the needs
> of servers
> and similar, it is intentionally not kept up to date and is extremely
> strict
> about licensing and potential legal issues. The only updates are
> security
> related, and the release process is slow, careful and infrequent.
> Most [all?] of the Debian based distributions intended for desktop or
> notebook
> use are based on "Unstable", anyone wanting to run multimedia using
> Debian is
> much more likely to find the software they want there, and will
> probably also
> want to use some extra repositories which are less strict about
> codecs, patents
> and so forth.
> At least one project, Sidux, has made it easy to run a very up-to-date
> Debian
> system by tracking "Unstable" closely and allowing reliable updating
> as
> frequently as the user wants to do it. Several multimedia oriented
> distributions make releases based on snapshots of "Unstable". I don't
> think that Debian "Stable" is a sensible choice for audio use, it just
> isn't intended for that purpose, and although the up-coming release
> will be much better than the previous ones it will still get out of
> date quite fast.
> Simon
> _______________________________________________
> Ardour-Users mailing list
> ardour-users at lists.ardour.org
> http://lists.ardour.org/listinfo.cgi/ardour-users-ardour.org
> _______________________________________________
> Ardour-Users mailing list
> ardour-users at lists.ardour.org
> http://lists.ardour.org/listinfo.cgi/ardour-users-ardour.org

More information about the Ardour-Users mailing list