On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> On Tue, 20 Jan 2004, Don Levey wrote: >> For me, I want to do music with pro-gear on Linux and like to have source
To correct the quotation, the above text was written by me, not Don. >> ALSA does work very well and has done so for a long time! Most of the >> problems people have been complaining about in this (and related) threads, >> have been about specific cards. There will be _never_ be a moment where > My biggest personal issue with ALSA is that I have been so far unable to > find any documentation that explains what the configuration file > directives represent. I don't know about you but I find it a lot easier Btw; I use ALSA on regular basis with over a dozen different soundcards, and have for many years, and so far I've never needed to edit any ALSA configuration files. For basic playback, recording (including multitrack recording and using JACK) the default out-of-the-box settings of ALSA have been sufficient for me. I've helped _lots_ of people with ALSA installation, and not a single time have I needed to edit asoundrc or any other ALSA rc-files. Ok, this just tells I don't use all ALSA's features that you do (I guess dmix/dsnoop is one feature that requires cfg-file editing and interests a lot of people). But what I mean to say, is that at least from my POV this is a problem that affects only a minority of users and thus is not a 1.0 -level showstopper. Also, as not everyone has needed to edit these files, less documentation has been written. I guess this will change now that we have dmix/dsnoop and other plugins. > My other complaint is that ALSA seems to have missed the boat by > seperating device abstraction and low level driver functionality. I > honestly do not see why JACK is a separate project. This pretty much > guarantees that developers will be stuck trying to decide what they write > to - direct to ALSA (messing up any existing sound daemons), arts, JACK, > whatever Gnome uses, dmix, roll their own, etc. Getting enough critical > mass for any of these options is going to be very difficult. Well, believe me, some of us tried _VERY_ hard, and spent countless hours debating sound server issues (see alsa-devel/linux-audio-dev/kde-multimedia/etc list archives), but the problem space was just too big and with too many parties (with different interests and many who didn't want to participate in the discussions) involved, so that's why we have and continue to have multiple frameworks for developing audio apps. My guess is that a second round of discussions will start after a year or two, and then we will end up with one (or at least fewer) framework(s). -- http://www.eca.cx Audio software for Linux! ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn _______________________________________________ Alsa-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/alsa-user
