26 Jun
2010
26 Jun
'10
4:13 a.m.
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 8:12 PM, Niels Mayer <nielsmayer(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 2:14 PM, Paul Davis
<paul(a)linuxaudiosystems.com> wrote:
well, partly because it means that any failings in whatever is wrapped
are likely to exist in the wrapper too. if the backend can't do X,
then neither can the wrapper.
...i don't believe that phonon is an
alternative to gstreamer.
in fact, if you look on this page:
http://phonon.kde.org/cms/1034
you'll see that its actually a wrapper around existing libraries like gstreamer
From a user-perspective, how does "wrapper" or any meta-level approach
to something not imply "alternative" ? Gstreamer applications just lockup
or fail when a device is busy
this depends entirely on the output plugin used, and what parameters
it is used with (as demonstrated by the way that Phonon manages to use
it).