20 Jan
2008
20 Jan
'08
6:47 p.m.
Pulseaudio is a layer to replace dmix which imho is a good thing. It by no
means negates existence of JACK or ALSA but rather tries to address
inadequacies of dmix/snoop. Look at the pulseaudio site/conference slides
for more info.
Best wishes,
Ico
-----Original Message-----
From: linux-audio-dev-bounces(a)lists.linuxaudio.org [mailto:linux-audio-
dev-bounces(a)lists.linuxaudio.org] On Behalf Of victor
Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2008 5:24 PM
To: Jay Vaughan; linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
Subject: Re: [LAD] alsa and OSS (again?)
Ok: my next question is, given that a software has native
alsa support, Jack support, do we need to put some effort into
adding 1) pulse audio support and 2) OSS support?
Is that a good idea or is it just a waste of time?
Victor
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jay Vaughan" <jayv(a)synth.net>
To: <linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2008 1:22 PM
Subject: Re: [LAD] alsa and OSS (again?)
There should be no distinction. The fact that there is, means that
the designs are broken. Audio should just plain work - period.
;
--
Jay Vaughan
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Does this mean that pulseaudio is preferred to Jack?
For desktop and user applications yes, for professional audio no.