Re: [LAD] incorrect number of samples reading from /dev/dsp1
Gordon JC Pearce wrote: > On Mon, 2011-01-31 at 21:55 -0800, farhan baluch wrote: > > I am trying to read data from a usb microphone and using the pretty > > standard method of using ioctl's to setup the sampling rate, channels, > > bits and block size . This all works so the device is correctly setup. > > I then use "read" to read samples from the device which shows up > > as /dev/dsp1. I get a lot more samples from this read command in one > > second of recording than the set sample rate. E.g. if i set 10Khz on > > one run i got 269312 samples. > > OSS has been obsolete for over a decade. Don't use it. But it's still supported. Of course, this API must be used correctly, i.e., after setting parameters, one has to check whether the device has accepted the value or has changed it to something supported. > What have you got the sample rate set to? It's possible that your card > isn't capable of reading at that rate so it goes to the nearest sample > rate it does have and then interpolates. In that case, it doesn't interpolate, it just returns data at the supported rate. Regards, Clemens ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] incorrect number of samples reading from /dev/dsp1
On Mon, 2011-01-31 at 21:55 -0800, farhan baluch wrote: > Hi All, > > > I am trying to read data from a usb microphone and using the pretty > standard method of using ioctl's to setup the sampling rate, channels, > bits and block size . This all works so the device is correctly setup. > I then use "read" to read samples from the device which shows up > as /dev/dsp1. I get a lot more samples from this read command in one > second of recording than the set sample rate. E.g. if i set 10Khz on > one run i got 269312 samples. Looking at the raw data it looks like > there is a lot of duplication of data? is this common for the audio > input device? if so what kind of encoding is it (e.g with some > specific redundancy built in)? > > > thanks > farhan OSS has been obsolete for over a decade. Don't use it. What have you got the sample rate set to? It's possible that your card isn't capable of reading at that rate so it goes to the nearest sample rate it does have and then interpolates. If you really must deal with audio hardware directly, use ALSA. Even better, use jack and abstract all that messy cruft away into a handy server. Gordon MM0YEQ ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
[LAD] incorrect number of samples reading from /dev/dsp1
Hi All, I am trying to read data from a usb microphone and using the pretty standard method of using ioctl's to setup the sampling rate, channels, bits and block size . This all works so the device is correctly setup. I then use "read" to read samples from the device which shows up as /dev/dsp1. I get a lot more samples from this read command in one second of recording than the set sample rate. E.g. if i set 10Khz on one run i got 269312 samples. Looking at the raw data it looks like there is a lot of duplication of data? is this common for the audio input device? if so what kind of encoding is it (e.g with some specific redundancy built in)? thanks farhan ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Attribution for Community Approval
On January 31, 2011 11:37:42 am drew Roberts wrote: > On Saturday 29 January 2011 18:59:32 Jeremy Salwen wrote: > > > Anyway that is the reason I delete the "or any later" term in my > > > copyright notices. Apart from the fact that one can never know whether > > > gpl4 will give all the rights exclusively to microsoft or google or the > > > nsa... I do not know why anybody would think this is even possible. The GPL is written by the Free Software Foundation. So being free is a foundational goal and the past 30 years and evolution of the licenses have shown this to be the case. Perhaps you should go and read their mission statement and about the history of all this before saying things like that. It is almost an impossible scenario since the license is clearly about keeping software free for anyone to use, develop, distribute, in accord with the license. It is logical to deduce that anything besides that would be contradictory to its intent, and possibly cancel any power of enforcement that the license carries. In fact there is no way for FSF to sign over any rights you have in the code you write. You always have the right to take your original code and put it out under a different license, free or proprietary. If anything towards what you suggested were to occur developers would just up and put their code out under different licenses. After all the work the FSF has put into these licenses I am certain they have examined many scenarios and possible outcomes of changing the license in one way or another. There is really nothing to fear in using the GPL. Raymond ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Attribution for Community Approval
On Saturday 29 January 2011 18:59:32 Jeremy Salwen wrote: > > Anyway that is the reason I delete the "or any later" term in my > > copyright notices. Apart from the fact that one can never know whether > > gpl4 will give all the rights exclusively to microsoft or google or the > > nsa... > > > > I have always wondered about this, as it never made sense to me to > > license > > your work under something which doesn't exist yet, and you don't know what > its terms will be! Will the GPL5 also give away rights to your organs > along with the software? Probably not, but I'm not willing to risk it. For a (strong?) copyleft license, there are benefits and dangers each way. People have to make their own call on this. > > Jeremy all the best, drew ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] What if a fork is not a fork?
On Saturday 29 January 2011 15:14:32 Raymond Martin wrote: > > Just because the licenses don't mention being nice, acting with little > > courtesy when it comes to using the code written by others won't hurt. > > Otherwise I agree with you. > > It won't hurt, but is not required in any way, shape, or form. And that is > what people on this list are making a fuss about. They acting like it is > absolutely required. That just shows ignorance of what FOSS is and that > they cannot read licenses properly. Not so sure about that. I think some people are saying that the licenses were not followed. Perhaps I misread. all the best, drew ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] What if a fork is not a fork?
On Saturday 29 January 2011 10:17:36 Jens M Andreasen wrote: > On Thu, 2011-01-27 at 22:05 +0200, Vytautas Jancauskas wrote: > > What if I "fork" a project because I think it gives me a good > > starting point > > or base for what I want to do but the direction I intend to > > take things will > > result in a completely different sort of program to the one I > > forked? > > a) We do not know neither your direction nor intend. > b) Is the program really completely different - according to who? > c) Because of a and b there is no c. Since I think I kicked this off: http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org/msg11217.html let me say that it was a general question and not one aimed at any current or planned fork. I just thought that for some people, it might be possible to start with something but take it in a very / completely different direction. So different that to name the one as a fork of the other might confuse people as to what the forked program was useful for. Hence: > > /j > > > Would another term be useful? all the best, drew ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] OT - git rebase - was [LAU] OpenOctaveMidi2 (OOM2) beta release
On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 10:04:01PM +0100, Robin Gareus wrote: > On 01/29/2011 10:01 PM, Robin Gareus wrote: > > On 01/28/2011 04:37 PM, torbenh wrote: > > > >> you really need to keep your history clean. > >> take a bit of time. use git rebase -i > >> before you push stuff upstream. > >> (or at least before you merge it into the master branch) > >> > >> this makes me sad. > > > > Hi Torben, > > > > Was that meant as sarcasm (kill the git hitory) or seriously - allow > > upsteam to cherry-pick easily? > > > > I rarely use rebase and only on local topic branches that have never > > been pushed to a public repo. It changes the history and will cause > > problems to anyone who has pulled that branch before. > > > > Since you are a git guru, could you please elaborate? > > > > answering [part of] my own question, "git guru" was the key: > http://gitguru.com/2009/02/03/rebase-v-merge-in-git/ > > "Rebases are how changes should pass from the top of hierarchy downwards > and merges are how they flow back upwards." > > Is that what you were alluding to? no. i am talking about a large set of commits only marked testing. these changes are pretty much random. however... the resulting change, is not too big. and could just have been squashed. and i am talking about using rebase, before pushing things up/to master. ccherret needed to push things, because alekz was testing them. but somthing like this should happen on a separate branch. > > robin -- torben Hohn ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
