Hey everyone,

On 10/9/06, jaromil <jaromil@???> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 10:37:52AM -0400, mike clemow wrote:
> > Even docked, I think (correct me if I'm wrong) that some of your RAM
> > is being sucked up by a ramdisk with Dyne.
>
> dyne has a very small RAM footprint, compared to other multimedia
> systems: 48MB for a X desktop without acceleration, 24MB for a
> desktop-less but complete system. While the ramdisk occupies 11MB of
> ram - rounded up to more or less.


Yeah, that's pretty small, wow... I guess it's more important to have tons
of RAM if your processing large audio files a lot. But recording shouldn't
as memory intensive.


> about my experience with low latency in dyne:II, i use the kernel and
> the core system, compiled with the gcc 3.4.4 included, to run video
> synching with zero-latency using hardware mpeg2 decoders
> http://montevideo.dyne.org/trac.cgi/wiki/IvySync
> and a C program in respawn on a tty.
>
> i hear of succesful experiences by the hackers of
> http://pudedyne.goto10.org with PD and Jack.


I use puredyne a bit too. It's nice to have PD with Dyne! ;-)

also i heard Paul Davis is planning to do something optimized with
> Ardour 2.0 on it http://ardour.org i'd rather listen his opinion about
> such low latency issues then :)


Yes, of course -- good point. I'm mostly just getting my number from the
cats on debian-multimedia, demudi, and 64studio mailing lists, who discuss
the realtime patches by Ingo Molnar, et cetera. Is the kernel for Dyne II
pretty close to vanilla, or is it patched?

in general you can do many wonderful things with a gnu/linux system in
> low-latency, like grabbing all kind of serial signals and process them
> blazing fast, i'm sure some of us here did it well with linux 2.4 and
> 2.6 just got better and better.



Happy hacking,
Mike