Just me or is Natty the biggest LinuxAudio Regression ever?

[Jaaxx]

What the heck is going on? Alsa sources in the repo won't build against the generic kernel sources in the same repo, seemingly duplicate (but binary diffs) firmware showing up in alsa-firmware and linux-firmware, kxstudio kernel metas with missing deps, etc, etc.

Wow.

[i2productions]

Agreed that 11.04 blows goats as a Linux distro. And doing simple audio tasks when I tested it resulted in the Linux equivalent of BSOD. But, Mint 11 based on it, so far has been one of the best audio distros I've ever used!

[funkmuscle]

what is Natty?

[atomkarinca]

It's Ubuntu 11.04. Ubuntu gives every release a different name. And the latest (stable) one is Natty Narwhal.

[funkmuscle]

oh thanx..

[GMaq]

Hi,

People seem to quickly forget that between-LTS releases of Ubuntu are basically Debian Sid packages with just enough orange lipstick and last-minute bug triage to get them into the current Ubuntu version. When you use the routine 6 month Ubuntu releases they are neither based on any stable framework NOR released with multimedia content creators first and foremost on their minds. I admire the efforts of the combined KXStudio/DreamStudio guys, I can tell you for a fact they must have their tongues hanging out just to keep up.

As a distributor myself I keep an eye on what goes on at the Debian pkg-multimedia mailing list and there is a LOT of bug fixing that needs to be done just to get things to hang together, many new apps have at least 2 or 3 revisions just to get them into Sid barely working, which is still their first go-round in the Debian system. People can play partisan politics but Ubuntu/Mint both have much of their behind the scenes fate tied to Debian Sid and in fact much of the packaging is done by guys who work for both Debian and Ubuntu etc.

To paraphrase 'Pink' with AV Linux I can tell you that the current state of Linux multimedia is a funhouse with more than it's share of evil clowns. I think for people to expect EVERY Ubuntu release to be a viable A/V Workstation is a completely unrealistic expectation. This upgrade/update mania is approaching an almost pathological level of dysfunction and even the casual observer can see that things have not been going in the right direction at all for multimedia on Ubuntu since Lucid was released.

I suggest those who actually want to create content with Ubuntu stick with and support the efforts of your packagers on the LTS versions. Just the view from here....take it with a grain of salt

[Jaaxx]

GMaq, I agree with you about all the hard work required to develop a stable audio setup from the sid mess. I was at one time a packager/developer for the RT kernel branch of PCLinuxOS and I can attest to the difficulties of shoehorning upstream into a usable distro.

My point is that Ubuntu is thwarting any efforts by upstream developers. Arbitrarily moving around firmware files and such does NOT make for stability. And these past 2 releases (Maverick, Natty) are almost useless in a way that I haven't seen since, well... ever. When users are better served in every way by compiling their own packages, there has to be something wrong with the distribution's mindset (as evidenced by the need for so much duplication in the kxstudio-team repos.)

[funkmuscle]

That's why I use Arch... to me Ubuntu is just a Windows replacement... I've never liked it and never saw the hype with it... And trust me, I've tried all flavours of Ubuntu and the top ten distros out there and with the freedom of Linux to customize the OS to your needs, Ubuntu was the furthest from that mindset.. But that's what you get with out-of-box distros..
So that leaves everything up to the devs and freedom is once again taken away.. That's why even though I don't use A/V Linux or specialty distros, I also point my new to Linux musician friends to those distros because GMaq and others have put in a lot of work to customize the distro of choice and have done some impressive work...
As I install Arch, I customize it for my audio, video and other needs. Nothing I don't need gets installed. it's a bit harder....well shouldn't say harder because installing Arch the way I want takes about 10-15 minutes, but it's what I want, not what the devs think we need.

[i2productions]

Funkmuscle, if you have the knowledge to configure yourself, than that's great! For the average person that's doesn't have the knowledge to compile on their own, and is just looking for a more stable than Windows/less expensive than the rip off that is Apple, an out of the box linux distro is a great way too go! Even when you do know how to customize your distro yourself, there are some distinct advantages to using a pre-compiled multimedia distro. Some production tools are hard to find, and even when you have all the packages, some things don't play as nicely with each other as they do when someone has taken the time to work the bugs out for you.

[funkmuscle]

i2productions, the reason I went to Arch and decided to learn how to tweak my distro was because the out-of-box didn't have what I needed or the latest versions of apps in the main repos... That's why we have A/V Linux and I don't compile, I know the apps I need and I just install that... None of the unnecessary things that come with the out-of-box distros.... I was just like everyone else and I figured Linux gives the freedom to install what you need.... What I've found is that when someone hears Linux, they think Ubuntu because of its popularity but I had a harder time installing and configuring it than Arch... I installed the base of the distro and then the apps I need... NO COMPILING... The tweak I do is to install the RT kernel, Jack and rtirq so that ain't even tweaking. It's actually a myth that Arch is difficult... all apps available at the repo. The ones that are not are at the AUR where you use an app like apt-get which fetches the app, downloads, builds and install it..... Nothing to think about and not restrictions like you get with the Deb distros.. I put Kbuntu on my daughter's laptop and had nothing but headaches so I installed ArchBang and in minutes, it was up and running.

[i2productions]

I suppose, to each their own. But what in the linux audio world would you NOT need. As far as ease of setup, kxstudio ftw! I love that I can issue six commands and get 100s of apps setup just the way I need them. There's nothing in their that I either don't use, or won't use at some point. Av Lin is pretty good, just don't like pure debian. That's why I'm such a proponent of mint, all the good parts of ubuntu without all the garbage, and moat of the bugs fixed! But again to each their own! And getting back to the original post, 11.04 isn't just a step back in linux audio, its a step back in linux in general. Do you know anyone thY actually likes unity? I don't know what the gnome guys are thinking with their new releases. Why reinvent the wheel? Don't fix it if it ain't broke!

[GMaq]

Why reinvent the wheel? Don't fix it if it ain't broke!

Bingo!

This is the greatest fault in Linux and it's greatest obstacle to mass acceptance, Progress is needed and good, improvement is needed and good. Completely ripping out something functional and replacing it with alpha level alternatives...not good. It seems to me (Linux in general) is becoming a locomotive hurtling downhill at a thousand miles an hour going nowhere, all for the sake of constant new development because the user gets bored if there is not a new version of something every 4 seconds, IMHO it's time to take this train into the station for a rest period of perfecting and solidifying what DOES work.

Years ago I had high hopes that Linux could be a better more reliable and configurable Windows XP. Some of the recent development upheavals under the hood in Linux make Windows 7 look like a subtle XP update. We have great new direction, streamlining and potential in the Kernels however the icing on top of it is melting pretty fast!

I'm not giving up, but I think a correction is needed in the direction Linux in general is headed. I am just completing AV Linux 5.0 and am very alarmed at the unusual number of GIT,CVS,SVN packages I've needed to custom build just to make it all work together.

Of course time will tell, but I truly hope the current pace slows down and developers realize that a round wheel that rolls easily doesn't need to be reinvented!

I suppose that's enough metaphors in one post....

[thorgal]

a couple of remarks:

Are you talking about Linux as in "Desktop Linux" ? or as in "Kernel" ? or maybe as in "distro" ?

Linux is first a kernel with a full "user ecosystem" that wrapped around it. Being mainly composed of open-source and free software, I don't think one can avoid the more dynamic evolution (including step-backs or even dead-ends).

However, distro folks have in principle the responsibility to put together a consistent linux based set of programs (user and kernel space) that can provide both versatility of use, system stability, comfortable experience and user-friendliness. If some distro releases suck butts, it is again in principle the fault of the distro managers / packagers. It is their decision to include such and such version of a software, compiled in such and such a way for such and such architecture. They are the ones who should know what they are doing. Linux as an OS has not much to be blamed for.

Just think about it: if the Windows kernel source were freely available, how many windows clones would we see pop up ? and how successful would they be ? It is quite amazing that some linux distros are not only successful but truly live up to their mission statement (I think about e.g. debian). Now, if Ubuntu is releasing sub-optimal versions for audio use (U.Studio has demonstrated that it can really be bad), it is the Ubuntu folks that should take the blame, if relevant. So, unlike GMaq, I don't think it is linux in general that "is becoming a locomotive hurtling downhill at a thousand miles an hour going nowhere", I rather think that this impression is due to a rather chaotic "distro-space" of which one can hardly find a parallel elsewhere.

[mikeh789]

the ubuntustudio contributors team had an official meeting today on the IRC (freenode) in the channel #ubuntu-meeting. this is where minutes, and updates on upcoming meetings and agendas are kept .:. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuStudio/Meetings . feel free to come and get involved and help ubuntustudio oneiric become a giant step forward. thanks everyone

[GMaq]

a couple of remarks:

Are you talking about Linux as in "Desktop Linux" ? or as in "Kernel" ? or maybe as in "distro" ?

Linux is first a kernel with a full "user ecosystem" that wrapped around it. Being mainly composed of open-source and free software, I don't think one can avoid the more dynamic evolution (including step-backs or even dead-ends).

However, distro folks have in principle the responsibility to put together a consistent linux based set of programs (user and kernel space) that can provide both versatility of use, system stability, comfortable experience and user-friendliness. If some distro releases suck butts, it is again in principle the fault of the distro managers / packagers. It is their decision to include such and such version of a software, compiled in such and such a way for such and such architecture. They are the ones who should know what they are doing. Linux as an OS has not much to be blamed for.

Just think about it: if the Windows kernel source were freely available, how many windows clones would we see pop up ? and how successful would they be ? It is quite amazing that some linux distros are not only successful but truly live up to their mission statement (I think about e.g. debian). Now, if Ubuntu is releasing sub-optimal versions for audio use (U.Studio has demonstrated that it can really be bad), it is the Ubuntu folks that should take the blame, if relevant. So, unlike GMaq, I don't think it is linux in general that "is becoming a locomotive hurtling downhill at a thousand miles an hour going nowhere", I rather think that this impression is due to a rather chaotic "distro-space" of which one can hardly find a parallel elsewhere.

Hi Thorgal,

Ok... granted I got on a bit of a tirade there induced by three solid weeks of bug squashing.

I am referring probably for the most part to Distributions and I find the dynamic of competition between them to be a curious thing that on some levels seems to be contrary to the open-source ethic. I agree with you that as an organization Debian is an amazing wonder of co-operation and efficiency and my beef is not really with the underlying frameworks that inhabit the space between the Kernel and the Desktop environment but more the Distributions themselves.

I enjoy the new developments in Linux multimedia applications as much as anybody, but looking at it from both sides I personally long for a plateau with complete static and bedrock stable environment to create with for a period of time to escape the constant diversion of development and just get down to work. For my minor part in this I hope to provide that concept for the end user, of course time will tell if that resonates with end-users in the long run.

Although I'm not a Ubuntu user/distributor I would suggest Ubuntu users answer the call in the previous post, it is clear that the Ubuntu 'problem' such as it is described is mostly due to a shortage of manpower and lack of a clear mandate from the user base. If they are asking for input it is certainly better to get on Ubuntustudio IRC and voice your concerns to the devs themselves rather than to complain 3rd party blogs, forums and mailing lists. As always just an opinion...take it or leave it.