[MPlayer-users] mplayer's jack name

[etienne deleflie]

All,

I just did a test, to see how other Jack enabled applications handle 
multiple instances.

PureData comes up as:

pure_data_0
pure_data_1
pure_data_2

Alsaplayer uses the PID .... bad example to set!!

and TimeMachine just uses "timemachine" and then the second instance 
says "cant connect to Jack server".

So it seems there is not really a standard for how to handle this 
situation.... I'd say the incrementor could be suggested as a standard 
solution.


>On Thursday 18 August 2005 04:12, Kevin DeKorte wrote:
>  
>
>>On Wednesday 17 August 2005 07:48 pm, Ivo wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>And fall back to "MPlayer [PID]" if none is specified, so people can
>>>still launch multiple instances of mplayer -ao jack without client name
>>>collision. What do you think? This would be easy to implement.
>>>      
>>>
>>What if you just tried using a connection name of
>>
>>mplayer-01
>>mplayer-02
>>.....
>>mplayer-99
>>
>>until you found a connection that would be free. That way the name would
>>be at least predictable.
>>    
>>
>
>That could be done, but what if a stray/zombie MPlayer -ao jack is running 
>and you start your chain of interconnected Jack-aware applications which 
>include MPlayer?
>
I am not an Mplayer developer .... but as a developer, I believe that it 
is not good programming practise to let an errorneous situation 
determine behaviour for a non-erroneous siutuation.  ;-)

Also, it would be more user friendly to not have to include an extra 
command line argument to have the functionality of multiple instances of 
Mplayer.

Etienne Deleflie

>Say, for example, that includes two MPlayer instances. You 
>might assume (predict) those will connect as mplayer-01 and mplayer-02, but 
>in fact they will connect as mplayer-02 and mplayer-03 (mplayer-01 is 
>already taken). As I see it, it's the most predictable when you specify the 
>client name on the command line. That way, you can be sure how it's called. 
>Unless a previous run of that same chain left something running, but in 
>that case you're out of luck with either implementation. In that case it 
>would be the best if MPlayer sets up it's connections to jack with whatever 
>client name it gets through (current implementation is fairly good at 
>that), prints an INFO line to stdout and have the rest of your boot up 
>script(s) scan MPlayer's output for that line, parse it and act upon it.
>
>--Ivo
>
>_______________________________________________
>MPlayer-users mailing list
>MPlayer-users at mplayerhq.hu
>http://mplayerhq.hu/mailman/listinfo/mplayer-users
>
>
>  
>