[08:11] <ttoine> hi
[08:14] <ttoine> can someone tell me if it is possible to backport soundconverter in 12.10, maybe 12.04 ? Bug #1077508
[08:15] <smartboyhw> ttoine, yes....
[08:16] <smartboyhw> ttoine, use requestbackport command in terminal (install ubuntu-dev-tools first)
[08:20] <ttoine> smartboyhw, is it not possible to use launchpad ? It is fixed in Debian, but not in Ubuntu...
[08:28] <zequence> ttoine: The procedure is to use the command tools (it's integrated with launchpad)
[08:28] <zequence> ttoine: Let's add a workitem for it. We need to start a routine for backporting (that workitem is already present)
[08:30] <zequence> I'll add a new blueprint for backporting
[08:30] <zequence> First, breakfest
[08:32] <smartboyhw> zequence, what's on breakfast today?;P
[08:57] <zequence> smartboyhw: Bread an cottage cheese (forgot my avocado at home)
[08:57] <smartboyhw> zequence, oh;P
[09:10] <zequence> ttoine: I feel the whiteboard on public relations covers just about everything. Is there something there you feel is missing? https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntustudio/+spec/ubuntustudio-public-relations
[09:11] <zequence> I think it might be good to wrap up the technical side of PR within the next couple of weeks, and start posting actively
[09:16] <zequence> Scott has made a good job of skething things out
[09:16] <ttoine> zequence, you are right, it covers almost everything
[09:17] <ttoine> zequence, sorry, I am a bit overloaded those days. I had my workshop sunday about recording with Ardour
[09:17] <ttoine> and was at the JDLL.org all the week-end
[09:18] <ttoine> will be better tomorrow, if I can find some time to sleep. I think I will try to make an illustrated doc on "recording music with Ubuntu Studio and Ardour"
[09:20] <ttoine> I meet a guy using CentOs and Planet CCRMA to make music. He did a workshop. Nobody understand anything. Too complicated... And with Ubuntu Studio, all worked out of the box.
[09:23] <zequence> ttoine: :)
[09:25] <smartboyhw> ttoine, good
[09:31] <zequence> ttoine: I updated this page with some info now https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuStudio/PublicRelations
[09:32] <zequence> It's just an edited version of the whiteboard
[09:39] <ttoine> zequence, ok. I have to go out of office. See you later.
[09:40] <zequence> cherio
[11:44] <smartboyhw> zequence (or any other guy in the dev team) please approve https://code.launchpad.net/~smartboyhw/ubuntustudio-default-settings/UbuntuStudio/+merge/135123 (you can't not merge it, 0.40 is up into raring-proposed already...
[12:55] <ttoine> hop
[12:55] <smartboyhw> ttoine, hop what?:P
[13:11] <astraljava> Beer hop, naturally.
[13:13]  * astraljava has this t-shirt: http://bit.ly/USOZjV
[13:21] <ttoine> astraljava, nice
[13:21] <ttoine> smartboyhw, hop, here again
[14:15] <len-dt> smartboyhw, micahg (or whoever releases) does that not us.
[14:16] <len-dt> We have been told to leave things as UNRELEASED
[14:16] <smartboyhw> len-dt, er actually I released that and dholbach sponsored it so...
[14:16] <ttoine> I am testing the 310 nvidia beta driver. It's fast. Amazingly fast !!!
[14:17] <smartboyhw> ttoine, :d
[14:18] <ttoine> from the startup to the login screen, and then switching between apps, etc... all is fast. I never seen that with my thinkpad before
[14:18] <len-dt> smartboyhw, why?
[14:19] <zequence> Has there even been any changes made to that source?
[14:20] <len-dt> zequence, some minor menu mods
[14:20] <zequence> smartboyhw: So you see, uploading had no purpose
[14:20] <len-dt> Two of them, both mine.
[14:21] <len-dt> It seems there is now an unofficial version of settings in the wild...
[14:23] <zequence> len-dt: What do you mean?
[14:25] <len-dt> if smartboyhw has had someone release something from his part of things as if it came from here...
[14:25] <len-dt> released where?
[14:26]  * len-dt is confused as to what happened.
[14:28] <len-dt> smartboyhw, anyway your merge is something we were told not to do.
[14:29] <zequence> I had a one on one conversation with smartboyhw about this. I'm hoping he will ask before acting on issues like this in the future
[14:29] <zequence> Asking is always welcome
[14:29] <len-dt> In that case I will say no more and leave settings as is.
[14:39] <ttoine> zequence, I have writen a small testimonial on your wiki page. good luck for membership
[14:40] <zequence> ttoine: Thanks. Yea, tomorrow is the day, so let's see how it goes :)
[14:41] <smartboyhw> zequence, you on the 12:00 or 22:00 membership board?
[14:42] <zequence> 12.00. I'm +1, so 22.00 would be a bit too late for me
[14:44] <zequence> Time to go home (zzz..)
[14:44] <smartboyhw> zequence, good I am gonna see the progress. Do they accept live testimonials?:P
[14:46] <ttoine> smartboyhw, it is writen that testimonials written on the wiki page are better for people who can't attend to the membership
[14:47] <smartboyhw> ttoine, so that's why I am going to do a "live testimonial":P
[14:56] <ttoine> http://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/decklink/
[14:56] <ttoine> linux driver for pro video hardware
[14:57] <ttoine> it is aimed at gstreamer acceleration. I a trying to talk with pitivi devel to see if they could handle that
[15:00] <ttoine> I am trying
[15:14] <holstein> zequence: you would think.. but then theres the "ralph" factor
[15:15] <zequence> holstein: First of all, I haven't recommended anyone to use an older lowlatency kernel
[15:15] <zequence> Second, what about ralph?
[15:15]  * smartboyhw wonders what is ralph
[15:15] <holstein> zequence: you can... im just talking about a user such as ralph from the list
[15:16] <holstein> ralph might be the kind of user who would expect US to support an older kernel
[15:16] <holstein> and should we?
[15:17] <holstein> it might just work fine... i agree that if the user typically knows how to switch kernels, they probably know how to deal with the consequences
[15:18] <zequence> I've considered this. Since newer kernels have been a bit poor, it might have been a plus to use an older kernel, such as 2.6.39, which was the first to support threadirqs, but also very fast
[15:18] <zequence> It's probably not possible to do in the main repo though
[15:18] <zequence> And I think this is a special case, which only a few people will want
[15:18] <holstein> the RT kernel from 9.10 works great
[15:19] <zequence> Well, so does -lowlatency 2.6.37
[15:19] <holstein> still, like you say few people want it.. and i argue even less need it
[15:19] <holstein> they see the term "realtime" thrown around, and want it... and thats fine
[15:20] <zequence> I haven't done enough live processing with the newer kernels to verify if they are able to give me what I need. I'm not very sure they can
[15:20] <holstein> i say, from a marketing perspective, we should be "the first audio distro providing excellent latency without the need for a realtime kernel"
[15:20] <zequence> And, if that is so, the group of people who would "need" a faster kernel, would be fairly large
[15:21] <zequence> holstein: But, it's not all together true, since -lowlatency is only possible thanks to the realtime patch, which now to a great extent lives in the vanilla kernel
[15:21] <holstein> so, whats not true?
[15:22] <zequence> What I'd like to say is -lowlatency is an officially supported kernel, while -rt is experimental
[15:22] <holstein> sure, but there is no "rt"
[15:22] <holstein> you can make one.. or try the ones from ppa.. but we dont have an rt one.. not even experimental
[15:23] <zequence> holstein: That -lowlatency is not a realtime kernel. Cause, it is, at least to the extent that it matters to the user (since as I said, the vanilla kernel nowadays includes much of the realtime patch)
[15:23] <zequence> It's not hard realtime
[15:23] <holstein> sure.. but if you want lowlatency in a default stock ubuntu.. thats what we have
[15:23] <zequence> But, it's realtime
[15:23] <holstein> and thats what we could talk about.. marketing-wise
[15:24] <zequence> Problem now is that neither a -rt kernel, or a -lowlatency (Debian has a -realtime kernel in their repo) is as good as they used to be
[15:24] <holstein> they didnt for a while though
[15:25] <holstein> and i still say, users typically dont need it.. they just want it, which is fine
[15:25] <zequence> Anyone doing live processing need it
[15:25] <zequence> Something as simple as playing a live synth
[15:25] <holstein> sure.. but who are they? most folks have internal cards.. do podcasting maybe
[15:26] <holstein> not a lot of folks do either effects nor synths
[15:26] <zequence> I don't know what makes you think that, but in my experience, people who make music quite often do live processing in one way or another
[15:26] <holstein> it would be nice to have something to offer them though, since 3 years ago we did
[15:27] <holstein> zequence: i find most users think they need it.. but really dont even have the harware to support it
[15:27] <zequence> We are offering it to them, with -lowlatency
[15:27] <holstein> zequence: sure.. but its not as good as rt from 9.10
[15:27] <zequence> I'm telling you, -lowlatency is if not exactly as good, then about as good as -rt
[15:27] <holstein> not nearly as good for my firewire
[15:27] <zequence> You're talking about kernel versions
[15:27] <zequence> Not, -rt vs -lowlatency
[15:27] <zequence> The -realtime in Debian repo sux as well
[15:27] <holstein> im talking about what came in the repos for 9.10 vs what is in the repo in 12.10
[15:27] <zequence> Why? Because of the kernel version
[15:28] <holstein> im talking about. i install and dont know what a kernel is/does
[15:28] <holstein> i can have as good performance as i had in 9.10
[15:28] <zequence> Add a realtime patch to 3.2, and it will suck just as much as -lowlatency
[15:28] <holstein> why is that? i might not care.. i might just move on. but i likely dont need it anyways
[15:29] <zequence> Because, as I said before, something in the vanilla kernel made it less responsive. And both -rt and -lowlatency suffers from that
[15:29] <zequence> So, what would you do, if you want to have low latency on 12.04, if neither -rt or -lowlatency is good enough?
[15:29] <zequence> Perhaps use an older kernel?
[15:29] <holstein> i would like to change the idea.. marketing wise
[15:29] <holstein> we are not going to have an rt kenrel in the repo
[15:29] <holstein> and the kernel is what it is
[15:30] <holstein> so, we could just try and state the facts.. 
[15:31] <zequence> If we could get some hard facts down, from testing -lowlatency vs -rt, we could clearly state how good/bad -lowlatency is. N
[15:31] <holstein> try and get folks to just try the software, and not really think/worry so much about getting sub 1 ms latency
[15:31] <holstein> zequence: i think that would be helpful
[15:31] <holstein> zequence: especially for some commom hardware types
[15:31] <holstein> zequence: you think for 12.10? 12.04? both?
[15:31] <zequence> I don't think most people are concerned with the 1 ms bit, just that they don't get xruns when using their OS for making music
[15:31] <holstein> zequence: i think we could get a nice cross section of harware represented
[15:32] <zequence> Someone would need to build -rt kernels, and add them to a PPA for testing purposes
[15:33] <zequence> If the kernel 12.04 would have been better performing (and again, not the fault of -lowlatency, but the kernel version itself), then I would have felt better about promoting it
[15:33] <holstein> or, just state the facts about what is default
[15:33] <zequence> I'm not sure those kernels are adequate for live processing
[15:33] <zequence> Which sux, bigtime
[15:33] <holstein> "im using default 12.04, stock kernel with x hardware, performance is x"
[15:33] <holstein> ^^ for example
[15:34] <holstein> maybe not a comparison so much as a statement
[15:34] <zequence> YEa, well. We did do those tests between -generic, and -lowlatency, if you remember. I even compared to -rt on 9.10. And at the time, the result was clear. -lowlatency kicked ass
[15:34] <zequence> But, the problem again, is not -lowlatency. It's the kernel version
[15:35] <holstein> yeah... well, hopefully its being addressed
[15:35] <holstein> not much we can do about it at this point.. with the lts..
[15:35] <zequence> I talked with someone in the kernel team about it in UDS, and they said they had found something weird, but no one knew what it was
[15:35] <holstein> to "fix" it.. i mean
[15:35] <holstein> zequence: great....
[15:36] <holstein> zequence: i wish we had a representative up there.. someone with our interests in mind... 
[15:36] <zequence> This is why I'm not a big fan of LTS for Ubuntu Studio. 9.10 was our LTS
[15:36] <smartboyhw> holstein, if that so it will be zequence :P
[15:37] <zequence> Actually, let me try jack quickly on 13.04..
[15:37] <holstein> zequence: i should be doing that too.. and can
[15:39] <zequence> It's not good enough
[15:39] <zequence> I mean, the kernel on here
[15:39] <zequence> Well, maybe. 
[15:39] <holstein> i could load up the 64bit 13.04 on my main rig and test with firewire when i get my device back over here
[15:41] <zequence> Ok, so this is ok. I don't seem to get xruns at 64 f/p, that's about 2.7ms latency (in jack, but it's not the real latency)
[15:42] <zequence> That's my acceptable limit. 128 f/p works, sort of, but it's a little too much
[15:42] <zequence> If 32 f/p worked, that would be a great safe margin
[15:42] <zequence> I'd need to have the system running for a while to catch any random xruns
[15:42] <zequence> That's the main problem I saw with 12.04 and 12.10.
[15:42] <zequence> Yep, I just got one
[15:42] <holstein> thats how i feel about it.. acceptable
[15:43] <holstein> not rip-roaring like 9.10/10.04 was...
[15:43] <zequence> So, this is probably not good enough for me then
[15:43] <holstein> i have a few devices though... firewire and a few usb's
[15:43] <zequence> And the 3.7 kernel is no better than those on 12.04 and 12.10
[15:44] <zequence> jta: Hey man
[15:44] <holstein> is anybody way upstream with this issue?
[15:44] <smartboyhw> zequence, jta holstein bye
[15:44] <smartboyhw> holstein, what do ya mean?
[15:44] <holstein> i mean, this is not ubuntustudio specific, correct?
[15:44] <holstein> all newer kernels suck, correct?
[15:45] <zequence> holstein: No. This has only to do with the vanilla kernel source
[15:45] <holstein> zequence: wonder if we can just go up there and sort it out? then it'll trickle in to everyone
[15:45] <holstein> zequence: do we know anyone up there?
[15:45] <zequence> holstein: I'm not sure anyone even knows why
[15:46] <smartboyhw> holstein, zequence the problem is that you can't get official -rt patches for 3.7... They only release for like 2.6, 3.0, 3.2, 3.4, 3.6, 3.8 and so on...
[15:46] <holstein> and its challenging since its not a goal up there
[15:46] <zequence> The linux kernel is from what I understand the largest software project in the world
[15:47] <zequence> So, not easy to keep track of all the changes in the code
[15:47] <zequence> But, I'm sure someone knows something
[15:48] <zequence> It's not something we can do, anyway (until one of us becomes a kernel hacker)
[15:49] <holstein> maybe i'll ask casually in #ardour
[15:49] <holstein> those guys are sharp
[15:50] <holstein> or, if we could get someone like jono using the software and asking (complaining) about it
[15:50] <zequence> There are a couple of guys who work on kernel code, and I believe one or two of them might be in there
[15:51] <zequence> jta: So, did you have a launchpad account
[15:52] <zequence> jta: We're using launchpad for most of the things we do now, so you'd really need to get into speed with that, at least so that we know your lp username
[15:53] <jta> zequence: not yet, I have been busy wrapping up my event season...
[15:53] <jta> I will float it to the top of my list so it gets done sooner zequence 
[15:54] <jta> zequence: ok done, it's in the top section of my todo list
[15:54] <zequence> jta: Ah, great. It's just very convenient when doing planning
[15:54] <zequence> And you'll be able to see changes that we do also, and be up to speed with what's happening
[15:58] <jta> zequence: cool, thanks for the prompt
[16:42] <knome> zequence, mind if i use your first name on your wikipage?
[16:42] <zequence> knome: Of course not. :)
[16:42] <knome> zequence, great, thanks
[16:51] <knome> zequence, i've added a testimony for you
[16:53] <zequence> knome: Thanks a bunch :)
[16:54] <knome> np
[17:41] <zequence> Actually, I'm going to change my opinion about -realtime vs -lowlatency now
[17:41] <zequence> It's just that -lowlatency 2.6.37 was a great combination, but on later kernels, -rt is still very much ok
[17:46] <zequence> holstein: I just did some testing with -rt on Wheezy. It's 3.2 series. 
[17:46] <zequence> It's quite ok, actually
[17:47] <zequence> I'd need to run it for longer periods, to make sure
[17:47] <zequence> I did have some problems with it in the past, but not sure if it was my own fault
[18:36] <holstein> zequence: i was going to look to be sure but i think thats where AVlinux stopped
[18:36] <holstein> 3.2.x
[18:37] <zequence> There's no newer kernel for Debian, in fact
[18:37] <holstein> they build custom ones
[18:37] <holstein> he has a kernel guy.. and he does the rest
[18:38] <holstein> the performance so far is quite nice
[18:38] <zequence> I think their kernel is 3.0.36 
[18:38] <holstein> its not installed on my main machine, so i dont have a good analog to it
[18:39] <zequence> I'm building 2.6.38 right now, to do some tests. I was just at #lad talking about kernels, and we started doing some cyclic tests
[18:39] <holstein> COOL
[18:39] <holstein> thats what we need.. data
[18:39] <holstein> and a kernel dev
[18:39] <zequence> Well, we still can't use -rt, unless we use an older kernel for some of the releases
[18:40] <zequence> Since the realtime patch is not released for every kernel version
[18:40] <zequence> But, if -lowlatency does not improve, I might find the motivation to see about making that happen
[18:40] <zequence> But not sooner than 14.04
[18:40] <holstein> well, a ppa would be fine, if folks want/need it
[18:41] <holstein> i was hoping by 14.04 we would all be using a generic kernel for everything
[18:42] <zequence> while -lowlatency is at best useful, -generic is not even nearly
[18:42] <zequence> And I don't think that situation will improve easily
[18:42] <zequence> Cause no one is really asking for a kernel like that
[18:42] <zequence> Except for some hippie musicians
[18:42] <holstein> yeah... its not in the main stream desktop need
[18:42] <holstein> servers i suppose dont need it either
[18:43] <zequence> Servers need the contrary
[18:43] <holstein> i tried the liquorix kernel
[18:43] <zequence> That's probably why we're not getting what we need
[18:43] <zequence> servers are optimized for throughput, which is something realtime sacrifices
[18:47] <zequence> holstein: This may answer some of it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Linux#Con_Kolivas.27_criticism_of_kernel_politics
[18:47] <zequence> Well, maybe not :)
[18:48] <zequence> But, linux on such platforms as Debian/Ubuntu are definately more used for servers than desktops
[18:48] <zequence> And the business is more tuned towards that
[18:53] <holstein> which is fine, if we could get someone like AVlinux's kernel guy to help us... get him up as a motu for a specific kernel
[19:00] <zequence> holstein: I think I'm more than capable of maintaing a kernel, so that's not the issue
[19:00] <zequence> But, coding is another thing all together
[19:03] <holstein> zequence: i think it would be great if it were you
[19:04] <zequence> I'm pretty happy with -lowlatency right now, since with very little effor, we get a pretty nice kernel that can do most people well
[19:04] <zequence> But, if things don't change in the future, I will probably want to see a possible addition of a -rt kernel
[19:05] <holstein> yup.. its a good place to be
[19:12] <zequence> heh, I need to start using bigger partitions for my installs
[19:12] <zequence> 40GB, with /home on a separate partition (mostly), I almost ran out of space just now
[19:14] <zequence> Ah, of course. It's the Linux Steam game
[19:31] <zequence> holstein: So, I booted into the 2.6.38 kernel, and did the cyclic test
[19:32] <zequence> holstein: There's one thing that kind of determines how well it performs
[19:33] <zequence> On -lowlatency 3.7 I got max:~1200, on -rt 3.2:~130, and again, the -lowlatency 2.6.38: ~473
[19:33] <zequence> On -generic it would be something like ~4000
[19:33] <zequence> So, 2.6.38 is so damn good, you don't even need more
[19:34] <zequence> But, for some reason there has been a regression since then
[19:34] <zequence> And the current lowlatency just doesn't match up
[19:35] <zequence> Well, the 2.6.38 -generic might be better too of course
[19:35] <zequence> Better than current -generics, that is
[19:43] <zequence> holstein: :(. Actually, 2.6.38 on this release was not a big success, when I had it on for a bit longer.
[19:43] <zequence> It's still better than the current kernel, but not by as much as I had hoped
[19:43] <zequence> The difference is not big enough to be important
[19:48] <micahg> 2.6.38 was part of natty (11.04) which is no longer supported
[19:50] <zequence> micahg: Yea, I'm just testing performance. I