(Cc:ed to #313563 which requests that the new esound be packaged.) On Wed, 2005-06-15 at 05:02 -0400, Matthew P. McGuire wrote: > On Mon, 2005-06-13 at 13:17 +0200, Thomas Hood wrote: > > Does this problem look anything like the one in #312299? > > Nope, not the same thing. In my case ESD would not access the sound > device at all. It would complain about the device not having the right > sample rate and whatnot, bump down to the next sample rate, and > eventually give up saying no suitable device available. By adding the > line... > > period_size 2048 #1024 -- Required by ESD, possibly others
Reading dmix.conf I see that you should be able to set this value by setting cards.<driver>.pcm.dmix.period_size to 1024. > ...to the default dmix settings in alsa.conf I got ESD to recognize the > card and use the device. I am not entirely sure why it works but it > does. Truthfully this could be an esd problem since gstreamer apps use > the alsa without any problems. I don't see anything of the sort in the > bug reports for libesd-asla0. [...] On Wed, 2005-06-15 at 05:35 -0400, Matthew P. McGuire wrote: > I found that the dmix problem in esd has been solved upstream for esd. > This was done May 25 2005 so it hasn't made it into testing yet. > The esd source package in unstable has been delayed, for what looks > like buildd or ftbfs problems. There is a new upstream release, 0.2.36, dated 2005-06-06 which contains ALSA related fixes. I presume that that is the version you tested. I see no evidence that the esound maintainer has tried to package it for Debian yet. What makes you think that it has been delayed by a buildd or ftbfs problem? -- Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
