On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 1:05 PM, Austin English <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 10:08 AM, Bryan Haskins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm more interested in a direct pulseaudio gateway for Wine... since by > > application sound control is the biggest thing here for most people.... > wine > > is treated as one big audio blob. Pulse sees it as one thing. In effect, > > wine handles it's own audio (by talking with ALSA or OSS) then passes that > > through to the outside sound server... which in most cases would simply be > > ALSA or OSS itself, but in this case it gets passed to ALSA/OSS and through > > this talks to pulse. I call that pretty messy when we could just directly > > talk to pulse audio (easily, too) and have by applications control. Pulse > is > > going to be in pretty much every distro soon. For a 1.0 release, no one > > wants to go out of their way to accomodate the shortcomings of our audio > > control. > > > > Even directly sending the blobof output to pulse directly at first would > > simplify things. I know this means yet asnother audio output method to > > maintain, and for various reasons many are against it. But this is similar > > to us needing to improve ALSA support rather recently. Pulseaudio does > > directly support ALSA, but it's a bit demanding on how it need to work to > be > > perfect. > > > > ALSA, Pulseaudio, and OSS are probably the big three we need support for. > > Pulse is a drop in replacement for things like Network Sound, and way > easier > > to configure and use. > > > > Sorry for expanding the topic so much. > > > > > > > > On 4/2/08, Susan Cragin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > This site purports to give instructions on how to run certain > > applications, including Skype (which is 32-bit). I think wine should have > > instructions here too. > > > > > > http://www.pulseaudio.org/wiki/PerfectSetup > > > > > > It doesn't look like pulseaudio is going away from Ubuntu anytime soon. > > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pulseaudio/+bug/198453 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This has been brought up before, and it's quite a bit of work. You > can't just simply forward everything to pulse call it a day, you'd > need to implement a full structure/drivers/etc., which would require > quite a bit of time/work and is likely outside of the scope of 1.0. >
And I believe Julliard rejected the idea of adding a pulseaudio driver. -- James Hawkins