Re: [FFADO-user] Failure connecting my FF Liquid Saffire 56

[Eric K. <eri...@ic...>]

Hi Jonathan 
On Jun 14, 2014, at 2:32 PM, Jonathan Woithe <jw...@ju...> wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 08:43:45PM +0000, Eric Klinger wrote:
>>> As you are compiling, why not 2.2.1 ? The mixer would be more friendly.
>> 
>> I went back through the install log (I usually make a copy for stuff like
>> this) and this is what I came across...
>> 
>> I couldn't find all the prerequisites ('pyuic4' and the python-modules 'dbus'
>> and 'PyQt4', the packages could be named like dbus-python and PyQt) to build the
>> mixer.
>> Therefor the qt4 mixer will not get installed.
> 
> As you've probably guessed, this means that your 2.2.1 compilation is not
> including the mixer since some of the prerequisites for compiling it are not
> on your system.  Depending on your distribution, you may need "*-devel" or
> "*-dev" packages corresponding to pyuic4, python dbus and python PyQt4.

I had all of the requirements, but I was collecting and installing them after 
“scons PREFIX=/usr” and before “scons install” which later I found to be my big
problem!


> 
>> thought I saw somewhere that the mixer was 2.1.0 and I paused for a
>> second to wonder why, but it quickly passed.
> 
> :-) I think we now know the reason.
> 
>> If it is friendlier, I will certainly re-re-compile! :-)  Thanks.
> 
> See how you go finding the necessary packages to support the compilation of
> the mixer.  Once these are in place the mixer should be build, and will then
> be installed with the rest of the FFADO system.
> 
>>>> 1402686896238790: Error (PosixThread.cpp)[ 161] Start: Cannot create realtime thread (1: Operation not permitted)
>>>> 
>>> You should be a member of the jackuser group under Fedora (and whatever, join also the audio group).
>>> Have a look to the /etc/security/limits.d/95-jack.conf to see if your priority level is suitable: you should have something like rtprio 99.
>> 
>> Will check it out for sure, the 95-jack file priority level is 70.  I will try it raised to 99 in the meantime.
> 
> When one requests a certain priority level using "-P ..."  with jackd, this
> is only a reference level.  While some jackd threads will run with this
> priority, there will be others created at higher levels calculated at fixed
> offsets from the value given by "-P".  Phil's suggestion to rise the limit
> in the 95-jack.conf file is a good starting point.

This is an area I need to educate myself with, I seem to associate lower 
numbers with giving higher priority - for whatever reason.

> 
> Regards
>  jonathan

Best,
Eric