On 15 November 2010 15:44, Jan de Groot <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 06:35 +0800, Ray Rashif wrote: >> On 15 November 2010 04:11, Jan Steffens <[email protected]> wrote: >> > One of the problems of PulseAudio is that it pretty much becomes the >> > default as >> > soon as you install it: >> > - The client library will start the server if it's not running. >> > - pulseaudio will install .desktop files that autostart the server >> > together >> > with Gnome or KDE. >> > >> > Splitting libpulse would prevent that, but I believe we still need to test >> > on a per-application basis whether we can enable PulseAudio support (with a >> > dependency on libpulse) without breaking fallback to ALSA on systems >> > without >> > pulseaudio. >> > >> > Some packages (like sdl and openal) look for libpulse dynamically and will >> > still work even though the lib is missing, so they only need an optional >> > dependency. >> >> A tentative repo to test this out wouldn't be a bad idea, IMO. > > AFAIK that repo was called "community". As for splitting up packages for > pulse support: whenever depending on libpulse still keeps pulseaudio > support optional, I'd rather depend on libpulse than split the package > itself.
I do not see any "libpulse". What I meant was a trial for this proposal. I wouldn't know whether we want these rebuilds to flood [testing], but maybe I'm wrong. As I can see, there are quite a good deal of apps with an option for PA support. I'd want to make sure this libpulse method can actually work for them.
