[13:13] <OvenWerk1> zequence: The set of apps for audio looks good (at a glance) The idea of the PD set/meta is reasonable too. I could see that being used alone in some applications. Photography has an appliaction added as well BTW.
[13:15] <knome> what's the status with the LTS proposal for studio?
[13:16] <OvenWerk1> zequence: I see someone is advocating adding the RT kernel again. I am not sure if that is good or not. The pro is that lots of people want it and feel they need it. The con is that it varies much more widely from the vanilla.
[13:16] <OvenWerk1> I think the latest is three years
[13:16] <OvenWerk1> For LTS. I have not been too active this cycle.
[13:17] <OvenWerk1> knome ^^^
[13:18] <knome> ah, right.
[13:18] <OvenWerk1> zequence: the other con for the RT kernel is that people expect it to be a silver bullet to give them low latency operation. This is not true and in fact newer MB seem to have more trouble
[13:23] <OvenWerk1> zequence: I should qualify that... I think the tweeks in new MB are different from older ones and I also think the kernel could do more for low latency operation. For example, the kernel detects hyperthreading at boot and if it is turned on or not, but provides no method of turning it off or defeating it. Yet defeating HT will make the difference from being able to do 5ms latency to sub ms latency. Reserving irqs for HW is another area the kernel
[13:24] <OvenWerk1> The kernel will assign irqs for HW that the BIOS has not already assigned and does do a better job than BIOS in many cases. It would be nice if it could reassign ones that are badly done.
[13:31] <OvenWerk1> Modern MB generally have a minimum of 48 irq channels and many have 96 and yet there still seems to be a clump of HW using irq 16  :P  Does windows need this? Does DOS?
[13:34] <OvenWerk1> I guess if I had a kernel wish list  :)  it would include a config file (instead or as well as command line) and an irq table.
[13:42] <OvenWerk1> messing around with a command line at boot or in grub is more painful than it needs to be.
[14:47] <zequence> OvenWerk1: I'm fine with adding linux-rt as a possibility for the hard core audio people, if someone is willing to package one
[14:48] <zequence> The kernel doesn't need to be packaged for Ubuntu Studio, but we can decide to make use of it
[14:48] <OvenWerk1> zequence: I agree we should not maintain it.
[14:48] <zequence> Well, it's up to whoever wants to. I might do it later on, but not now
[14:49] <OvenWerk1> It should be trivial to change grub to put RT first instead of lowlatency
[14:49] <zequence> OvenWerk1: I think that GRUB code is not there anymore
[14:49] <zequence> You remember, the UEFI bug?
[14:49] <OvenWerk1> That is different
[14:50] <zequence> Well, I haven't checked. Still, I think it would be good if you could check out a generic solution
[14:50] <OvenWerk1> They are two different things
[14:50] <zequence> Ah, right
[14:50] <zequence> It was about changing the name of the OS
[14:50] <OvenWerk1> Yes
[14:50] <zequence> I think there was some effort done to make that possible
[14:51] <zequence> possibly pushed upstream already
[14:51] <OvenWerk1> When I have time/energy I will look at changing it back. I will have to see if my wifes BIOS will make testing possible for me.
[14:52] <zequence> Alright
[14:52] <OvenWerk1> In the mean time, having the lowlatency/RT label takes a lot of confusion out of things