Folks, I've been seeing some problems with PulseAudio and functioning with OSS 4.1. I've had far better experience with my audio hardware with OSS (and 4.1 is the latest stable version) than Alsa where the outputs are jumbled. I realize there is some frustration with some API changes since 3.99 and I also realize that their business model through licenses is also frustrating. I've been writing to them (4Front) encouraging to make the business model free "as in beer" as people are not buying it often if at all, Ubuntu has articles on getting directly from a remote repository, plus Sun is doing their own spin-off rather than paying 4Front, so their developers are resigned to the fact they cannot make this their full time careers through licensing. I am hoping at this point they will decide to join those looking to benefit the linux community and use their contributions to get funding from government and corporate groups for quality control and development. I feel the tone of the comments I'm seeing on the issue of PulseAudio with OSS 4.x feels a bit confrontational on both sides. I could be wrong of course. Each is saying its a problem with the other. I suspect there is an element of truth in both. I was sent a reply to a ticket saying that "no one was interested" in doing any patchwork to get oss 4.x working with pulseaudio. I trust this is not as extreme as the comment sounds, as there are those who see the benefits of the OSS Drivers, especially on high end hardware. I myself am one of those who given the state of ALSA, is not prepared to go to poor sound on high grade hardware and no one should have to. Its an opportunity to show off the best PulseAudio has to offer. (and on a high end linux based audio appliance that is saying something)
I was wondering what it would take to get one of your people to start some work on this. Linux is at a stage it could do even more serious damage to MS than it already has, but sound quality is still an issues. I myself had had issues with Alsa that OSS fixes but people are slow to see this because of the pervious licensing terms which seems to have caused a backlash in the Linux community for understandable reasons. However I feel this will slow and cripple Linux adoption, especially those who spend more money and give hardware vendors incentive to spend more time ensuring Linux support. It seems unfair that the community should have to start the fire for hardware vendors to properly support a superior OS, but such is life. PulseAudio could be significant in bridging some serious gaps in Audio sound quality and sharing, but only we use ALL our options. I realize your module-oss is an effort to do exactly that, and the changes in OSS 4.x are likely frustrating your efforts. The OSS developers say ths is a "good reason" for the changes. Could you guys talk about it. (you and 4Front? ) Again, I use OSS because frankly, ALSA doesn't work with my audio hardware well, so OSS is what I use because the sound for playing movies, music and even (gasp) games. I've written to 4Front Technologies and I'm now writing you,the developers of PulseAudio. What will it take to get this bridge filled in with OSS 4.x and establish better cooperation between you and 4Front, or whomever is doing work for OSS? I see real potential with these technologies to do some serious advancing in sound in Linux. I'm hoping I can help make it happen in my own small way. (Perhaps larger ways as well as my time and skills permit) Regards, Jonah A. Libster [email protected] _______________________________________________ pulseaudio-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://tango.0pointer.de/mailman/listinfo/pulseaudio-discuss
