[Mageia-dev] Jack1 package missing

Sat Nov 3 15:11:12 CET 2012

Jehan Pagès a écrit :
+> Hi,
+> 
+> I noticed we propose only the Jack2 package, but no Jack1. Yet Jack2 is
+> simply another implementation in C++ of the Jack protocol, and not a
+> newer version (as the official website also states clearly:
+> http://trac.jackaudio.org/wiki/Q_differenc_jack1_jack2 ).
+> 
+> Plus I had a very annoying bug with Ardour when using Jack2, and people
+> on Ardour mailing list told me it was a known issue with Jack2 (both
+> Ardour and Jack2 were installed from the Mageia 2 packages). I compiled
+> Jack1, and it indeed fixed the issue.
+> 
+> So I am thinking on proposing a spec for Jack1.
+> 
+> But then I have questions:
+> 
+> 1/ How should I name this package? The jack2 package is named "jackit"
+> and I have no idea where you got that from (I guess this is a shorter
+> name for "Jack Audio Connection Kit", but should we really change
+> package names this way? 
+> It is not that long). The official alternative
+> name of Jack2 is "jackdmp" (see README here:
+> https://github.com/jackaudio/jack2 ). I saw nowhere else this "jackit"
+> naming.
+> 
+We inherit this from Mandrake : in the early years of Mandrake a jack
+package already existed but it had nothing to do with JACK (Jack Audio
+Connexion Kit) : it was a console frontend for cd rippers, still
+provided in Mageia...
+
+When JACK was imported into Mandrake it had to be given an other name...
+so jackit !!!
+There was a tonic controversy on Mandrake forum about this in 2003 or
+2004 year.
+Mandrake and then Mandriva and and then Mageia are the only
+distributions calling JACK package "jackit" ....
+> So I am questioning the naming of this existing package, and would like
+> to propose some rename along with a new name for a Jack1 package.
+> Maybe simply "jack1" and "jack2"? Or "jack" and "jackdmp"?
+> 
+> 2/ How should the virtual dependency be named?
+> The existing "jackit" spec provides a "jackit-devel" and a "libjack-devel".
+> 
+> I think that none of the names are really fit IMO. First jackit for the
+> same reason as before (I don't see where this name comes from), also
+> libjack (and the -devel suffix) because this kit is not *only* a library
+> (there are also the jackd daemon, tools, etc.).
+> 
+> I propose simply "jack" as virtual package name.
+> 
+> How does this sound?
+> Thanks.
+> 
+> Jehan
+Not simple because of this context ...
+If you want to call JACK jack you need to remove first the existing jack
+from the repo, and to modify the spec for every package requiring jackit
+now, to make them require jack if it is the new package name for JACK .
+
+Post Scriptum : Reading this I don't know if my explanation  is clear
+enough ...
+A key to understand what I wrote :
+"jack" is the name of a package (whatever its content is)
+"jackit" is the name of a package
+"JACK" is the recursive acronym (Jack Audio Connexion Kit) of the
+software you are talking about
+
+