On 24.01.2019 07:38, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
>>> https://xkcd.com/927/
>>
>> There is a different context on BSD than on Linux. We can choose one
>> solution and switch to it literally all the software keeping everything
>> in a single ports tree.
>>
>> This is what happened on OpenBSD.
>>
On 2019-01-24 07:38, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
[...]
> I'm not going to join the sndio vs. pulse discussion.
>
> But from a maintenance point of view it sucks big time to have a bunch
> of ways to play sound, and everybody uses a different one so you have to
> maintain a backend for each of those metho
Hi,
> > https://xkcd.com/927/
>
> There is a different context on BSD than on Linux. We can choose one
> solution and switch to it literally all the software keeping everything
> in a single ports tree.
>
> This is what happened on OpenBSD.
>
> The result is that almost everything uses sndio,
On 23.01.2019 16:12, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 09:54:13AM -0500, Brad Smith wrote:
>> On 1/23/2019 8:59 AM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
> What is the native sound interface for openbsd btw? oss doesn't
> compile (missing sys/soundcard.h header).
OpenBSD
On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 09:54:13AM -0500, Brad Smith wrote:
> On 1/23/2019 8:59 AM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>
> >Hi,
> >
> > > > What is the native sound interface for openbsd btw? oss doesn't
> > > > compile (missing sys/soundcard.h header).
> > > OpenBSD uses sndio, a similar audio daemon to
On 1/23/2019 8:59 AM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
Hi,
What is the native sound interface for openbsd btw? oss doesn't
compile (missing sys/soundcard.h header).
OpenBSD uses sndio, a similar audio daemon to pulseaudio and it's
enforced for all [well integrated] audio applications.
Hmm. Yet anot
On 23.01.2019 14:59, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
>>> What is the native sound interface for openbsd btw? oss doesn't
>>> compile (missing sys/soundcard.h header).
>>
>> OpenBSD uses sndio, a similar audio daemon to pulseaudio and it's
>> enforced for all [well integrated] audio applications.
>
Hi,
> > What is the native sound interface for openbsd btw? oss doesn't
> > compile (missing sys/soundcard.h header).
>
> OpenBSD uses sndio, a similar audio daemon to pulseaudio and it's
> enforced for all [well integrated] audio applications.
Hmm. Yet another audio daemon. /me wonders why
On 23.01.2019 13:20, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> Pulseaudio uses OSS backend on NetBSD anyway and we keep an in-kernel
>> mixer. So it adds nothing except additional intermediate layer.
>>
>> For non-professional audio purposes OSS is good enough for such
>> applications.
>
> What happens i
Hi,
> Pulseaudio uses OSS backend on NetBSD anyway and we keep an in-kernel
> mixer. So it adds nothing except additional intermediate layer.
>
> For non-professional audio purposes OSS is good enough for such
> applications.
What happens if pulseaudio is running and using the sound device? C
On 23.01.2019 12:16, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 at 11:09, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>>
>> On 23.01.2019 11:59, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>> On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 at 10:37, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
OSS is the portable UNIX audio backend. We could point some flaws in it,
but it's a
On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 at 11:09, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>
> On 23.01.2019 11:59, Peter Maydell wrote:
> > On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 at 10:37, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> >> OSS is the portable UNIX audio backend. We could point some flaws in it,
> >> but it's a good enough for portable UNIX applications. T
On 23.01.2019 11:59, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 at 10:37, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>> OSS is the portable UNIX audio backend. We could point some flaws in it,
>> but it's a good enough for portable UNIX applications. The question is
>> what UNIX-like desktop OS does not implement it
On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 at 10:37, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> OSS is the portable UNIX audio backend. We could point some flaws in it,
> but it's a good enough for portable UNIX applications. The question is
> what UNIX-like desktop OS does not implement it or removed it.
If your desktop's native audio
On 23.01.2019 11:12, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 10:50:18AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote:
>> On 2019-01-23 10:36, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 09:27:48AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote:
On 2019-01-23 09:00, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>
> This is RfC bec
On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 09:27:48AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 2019-01-23 09:00, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> >
> > This is RfC because we might look at the ordering. On linux we probably
> > want prefer alsa over oss.
> Yes, please! I've run into the trap a couple of times already: OSS
> headers we
On 23.01.2019 10:50, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 2019-01-23 10:36, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 09:27:48AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>> On 2019-01-23 09:00, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
This is RfC because we might look at the ordering. On linux we probably
want prefer
On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 10:50:18AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 2019-01-23 10:36, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 09:27:48AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote:
> >> On 2019-01-23 09:00, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> >>>
> >>> This is RfC because we might look at the ordering. On linux we p
On 2019-01-23 10:36, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 09:27:48AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote:
>> On 2019-01-23 09:00, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>>>
>>> This is RfC because we might look at the ordering. On linux we probably
>>> want prefer alsa over oss.
>> Yes, please! I've run into th
On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 09:27:48AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 2019-01-23 09:00, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> >
> > This is RfC because we might look at the ordering. On linux we probably
> > want prefer alsa over oss.
> Yes, please! I've run into the trap a couple of times already: OSS
> headers we
On 2019-01-23 09:00, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>
> This is RfC because we might look at the ordering. On linux we probably
> want prefer alsa over oss.
Yes, please! I've run into the trap a couple of times already: OSS
headers were available, but these days the OSS compatibility kernel
modules are not
Add the drivers listed in audio_possible_drivers to audio_drv_list,
using the try-* variants. That way the probable drivers are compiled by
default if possible.
This is RfC because we might look at the ordering. On linux we probably
want prefer alsa over oss. Not sure about pulseaudio. Most li
22 matches
Mail list logo
