15 Sep
2003
15 Sep
'03
2:39 p.m.
On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 09:18, hexe_2003(a)directbox.com wrote:
2.) oss-layers need ioctl() - calls to
manage/configure sound devices (and
ioctl() calls are just possible for root-users !!!!!),so oss is really
user-unfriendly if you want to programm a application
This is not true.
3.) alsa is easier to use for midi / pcm
capturing/playback
I can't say anything about MIDI, but not true for pcm capture/playback.
OSS takes about 4-5 lines of code vs ALSA ~30 lines.
My software supports both and I still recommend using the commercial OSS
drivers for it over ALSA because installing and configuring ALSA can be
PITA.
4.) both are less documentated ( I can tell you that
!!! :) ) , but alsa
has a few basing programming tuts for C ( c++)
There is a good PDF manual of OSS including tutorials and code samples.
5.) alsa is basicly said a "wrapper", a
front-end of the oss-arch and it is
highly recommended to use alsa at all.
ALSA has it's own drivers and it's own native interface. It's able to
emulate OSS at driver level.
--
Jussi Laako <jussi.laako(a)pp.inet.fi>