Ubuntu VS CentOS/RHEL in Wine?

mikeypee · 09-16-2014, 01:34 AM

Hey guys,

I'm wondering if anybody here has thoroughly performance tested Reaper in both CentOS and Ubuntu (running under wine), and has a preference, and why.

I've been using Reaper in windows for years and love it ... however, I've recently decided to start trying to get more comfortable with using linux as a desktop to see if I can tempt myself to switch away from windows permanently. Having admin'ed CentOS linux for quite some time, I'm most comfortable with that flavor and thus have it on my desktop right now.

However, I've also been reading about "RT (Realtime?) Kernels", and that Ubuntu might have that while CentOS might not. Has anybody tried this out? My experience with linux thus far has only been command line stuff for web server administration and general server stufffs.

I pulled Reaper up in wine tonight but won't have the chance to really punish the CPU with it until a couple weeks from now at least. I've never really been bothered about recording and mixing at higher non-ASIO latencies, and my main concern has always simply been "Can my PC handle all these dang plugins, routings, tracks, etc?"

Anybody got any info or first hand experience for me, thanks in advance!

inertia · 09-16-2014, 06:08 AM

Only go down this route if you have a lot of time to waste.

There is a realtime kernel available for Ubuntu as installable package but you can also compile your own RT kernel for Cent OS.

jerome_oneil · 09-16-2014, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikeypee

Anybody got any info or first hand experience for me, thanks in advance!

Yes. Don't do it.

richie43 · 09-16-2014, 12:21 PM

I think that I will only watch this "how can I or should I make Reaper work well in an OS that it is not designed to run at all in?" thread for once...... lol. I always end up being a real jerk.

paulheu · 09-16-2014, 01:35 PM

Yeah, same here.. SO you have a system running perfectly fine and apparently just for the hell of it decide to go and wreck your setup to try and make it work with some OS that will need a lot of work to get close if you ever manage. It's like driving a nice sedan and deciding to give it a go with a DIY and hope it drives car.

I just do not get the fascination people seem to have with running Linux in a desktop environment for a purpose it was never designed for. I also do not see any reason why it would be beneficial in general to run a Linux desktop environment..

richie43 · 09-16-2014, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by paulheu

I also do not see any reason why it would be beneficial in general to run a Linux desktop environment..

I actually understand the desire to use linux, especially for audio. As an OS, many linux distributions are awesome. I use various linux OS's for most of my computer needs (like right now). It is super efficient with resources if it's the right OS, and is highly configurable. I consider many linux versions to be like the "Reaper of OS"...But in my experience trying it for serious audio, it is not there yet. We will hear otherwise, and that's all good. I just have had terrible times trying it. And especially trying to force an app(Reaper, this time) that was designed for Mac's or Windows to work on it.... That's the silliest part about these threads, in my opinion.

Ooops, I was not going to "go there"....

paulheu · 09-16-2014, 02:51 PM

The resources angle may have been valid back in the XP/Vista days, but with WIN8 that one IMO just doe snot apply any more. I had an old EeePC netbook which was a dog on WIN7 but was fairly fluid and usable when running WIN8. I ran several Linux distros on it and the only one which was half decent was Mint but even that was not as smooth as WIN8.

Today many Linux distros seem to be so stuffed with bloat that they have become what they set out to replace IMO. WIN8 on the other hand is pretty much plug and play with no real need to tweak anything.

mikeypee · 09-17-2014, 06:00 AM

The main reason, for me, is the thrill of learning the tech. I'm a programmer and huge nerd by trade so this kind of thing is a blast for me (well, HELL until I get it working ... then a blast). Secondary to that is the idea of being able to rely 100% on a free and open source operating system. If you count my personal PCs, virtual machines I'm renting, and a little server I built ... I'm in control of something like eleven machines (down from twelve yesterday afternoon). That's a lot of $$$$ to part with for microsoft for a lowly broke d00d like me. Luckily most of those are linux already.

But yeah ... I think I get the picture now. Reaper in Linux is a huge no-no for now. Thanks for being straight with me, everyone.

I'll definitely be keeping my windows installs indefinitely even if I get to the point where I run linux primarily on my desktop... Reaper will just be one of the reasons to do so.

todd_r · 09-17-2014, 07:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by richie43

I think that I will only watch this "how can I or should I make Reaper work well in an OS that it is not designed to run at all in?" thread for once......

From downlaod page

"Windows versions also support Wine/Wine64"

richie43 · 09-17-2014, 08:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by todd_r

From downlaod page

"Windows versions also support Wine/Wine64"

I know that...But it's still a Windows version, designed to run best in Windows. Wine in effect emulates the Windows environment (makes the "calls") but it is not Windows. I have never had the same efficiency and seamless work using Wine as I do with my Windows/Reaper DAW. If you can handle the endless configurations and dependency resolving, have your fun. Oh yeah, there is also the search for drivers..... Maybe someone else has had better luck (there are already many threads on this forum that go into pages and pages of detail on the topic), but I had enough and would rather get to work when it's time to get to work. I am fine with using Linux for everything but audio (like right now!).

Nystagmus · 09-17-2014, 05:55 PM

Ubuntu Studio and possibly many other Ubuntu flavors already have a low-latency kernel and a fairly up to date linux kernel in general. And there is the option to upgrade in gradients to a few different improved choices all the way up to realtime.

I use Ubuntu Studio and it's been the best decision I ever made. It took plenty of research along the way since I don't have a live internet connection at home, but it worked just fine.

I have tried CentOS in the past, and it's okay, but it's more designed for businesses/corporations and is thus described as an "Enterprise" type of install.

It probably has a certain amount of bloat in terms of networking capabilities with respect to what a typical DAW would have.

In Ubuntu Studio, and Ubuntu in general, it's pretty easy to disable the unneeded junk:

Just use the "sudo" prefix and create a copy of each unwanted service file in /ETC/init/[filename].conf named [filename].override and make it's contents just the single line: manual

For example, if you don't want samba, then you find all the files related to samba such as /ETC/init/samba.conf and make a copy of it named /ETC/init/samba.override

Then you edit it's contents to just be the single line containing the text: manual

I usually do this at a terminal with: sudo gedit /ETC/init/samba.conf
and then I change the contents to "manual", and then do a "Save As..." and save it as
/ETC/init/samba.override

I did this with all the unneeded services on my system and it helped a lot.

There are some other tweaks of course, but at least this part is easy.

I just started demoing some other flavors of Ubuntu and Lubuntu seems like it might be a good candidate for a DAW since it's already streamlined to be "LightWeight". And it really is.

I'd try that out, or maybe even WattOS.

Something that I don't recommend is Linux Mint of any flavour.

mikeypee · 09-17-2014, 07:57 PM

Hey thanks for the advice, Nystagmus. Maybe I should give Ubuntu a quick try after all. I guess I started with CentOS because I've been doing that for general command line server stufffs and also maybe a little bit of ego ... as in, I've had a lot of linux n00bs start with Ubuntu and never go the command line route, so by going to CentOS, its my excuse to be like "Actually I started admin'ing from the COMMAND LINE" haha.

You know.. I never got into the whole "backup your config files" thing. I've always preferred to just use commenting to disable config lines and add explanations. Then again this did actually screw me over a couple times.

lol about Mint Linux

jerome_oneil · 09-17-2014, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nystagmus

Ubuntu Studio and possibly many other Ubunut flavors already have a low-latency kernel and a fairly up to date linux kernel in general. And there is the option to upgrade in gradients to a few different improved choices all the way up to realtime.

Just use the "sudo" prefix and create a copy of each unwanted service file in /ETC/init/[filename].conf named [filename].override and make it's contents just the single line: manual

For example, if you don't want samba, then you find all the files related to samba such as /ETC/init/samba.conf and make a copy of it named /ETC/init/samba.override

Then you edit it's contents to just be the single line containing the text: manual

Good lord, what a pain. CentOS or RHEL?

Don't want samba?

# service samba stop

Done.

Don't want samba starting up when the system starts?

# chkconfig samba off

Don't want it even manageable by the system?

# chkconfig samba --del

Mature systems provide tools for system administration.

Quote:

Something that I don't recommend is Linux Mint of any flavour.

Couldn't disagree with that any more. Mint is the only distribution I've ever dealt with that just installs and doesn't require ridiculous configuration efforts. That is a distribution that respects your time.

Back on topic: I still wouldn't run Reaper in it, under any circumstances.

richie43 · 09-17-2014, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jerome_oneil

Couldn't disagree with that any more. Mint is the only distribution I've ever dealt with that just installs and doesn't require ridiculous configuration efforts. That is a distribution that respects your time.

One of my computers has been using some flavor of Mint (I think the debian version) for a few years now. Awesome OS, super stable and snappy. I'll keep my audio life in Windows though.

Patrice Brousseau · 09-18-2014, 12:36 PM

If you like to tweak and go under the hood, it's fine. If you want to make music efficiently, go Win or Mac.

You have to find the driver for your interface (it was quite a pain for me when I had an Edirol Firewire), then Wine is some kind of emulation. The best I could have in term of buffers was 3x128 in Jackdmp. Buffer underruns at 64 (I like to have the least latency possible!).

It was fun but I didn't made a lot of music at this time

Patrice Brousseau · 09-18-2014, 12:39 PM

http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/wiki/hardware_support

richie43 · 09-18-2014, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patrice Brousseau

If you like to tweak and go under the hood, it's fine. If you want to make music efficiently, go Win or Mac.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patrice Brousseau

It was fun but I didn't made a lot of music at this time

This is what I was trying to say, just less eloquently!

inertia · 09-18-2014, 11:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by paulheu

I just do not get the fascination people seem to have with running Linux in a desktop environment for a purpose it was never designed for. I also do not see any reason why it would be beneficial in general to run a Linux desktop environment..

I think the fascination is just permanantely getting away from Windows but I gave up that dream long ago concering audio. It's just not mature enough from a software point of view. Windows audio applications have had millions upon millions of investment and the Linux equivalents just don't make the grade and probably never well.

Linux is not really a commercial platform so there will be little interest for companies to make Linux audio apps.

jerome_oneil · 09-19-2014, 12:09 AM

Linux is plenty mature. Just not on the desktop.

If you've got enterprise apps that need running, I can't think of a better choice.

Nystagmus · 09-19-2014, 02:28 PM

OK, I Need to Clarify...

About the .override files... that's the only technique I had known until the guy above posted the alternative. But I don't even know if my distro has the "chckconfig" binary program installed or not. I just went on what I saw listed on a "How to configure Linux for DAW/Pro Audio" type of website. And the overrides did work so I just went with that.

But by all means, if chkconfig works, then use that too.

About Linux Mint... yeah, it's nice IF you can get it to install. I read the release/bugs/known issues notes and it's incompatible with certain BIOS'es and hardware and won't even boot up. And that's exactly the problem I had when I tried to install it. Oddly enough, the LiveDVD works though.

So yeah, I'd be all for Linux Mint if I could get it to work! Anyways, I tried the rolling Debian version. If you do try to install whichever version, read the full release notes and bug reports and lists of known issues!

And the Linux Mint MATE and Cinnamon desktops are not as lightweight on resources as XFCE (as in Ubuntu Studio) and LXDE (as in Lubuntu). But of course, anybody can install their own preferred desktop and just go with that, so it's not really a deal-breaker.

Anyways, I hope I could help the OP with this. Your welcome, if so.

And of course you can still use the console in Ubuntu Studio also, since you seem to like it.