Re: Pulseaudio

Il giorno mer, 10/10/2007 alle 14.00 +0100, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro ha
> I tried and I'm still not convinced.  Unless there are some special
> kernel patches in fedora making a big difference, I still hate sound
> routed through a userspace daemon.  I would willingly tolerate it for
> sound coming from network applications, but it's not a price I want to
> pay for simple local applications when I don't care about PNP or network
> sound.
> IMHO Pulse Audio developers are just being stubborn; I have not yet any
> good reason why PA and direct ALSA access cannot get along.

You tried and you found it doesn't work for you, and that's fine -- I'm
happy to hear your opinion, _expecially_ because it is different than

I can say only that passing from ALSA to Pulseaudio *for me*:
- decreased overall latency
- meant I didn't have to configure it at all, except modifying my
asound.conf a little, when I wanted full ALSA apps support.
- now I can play two or more totem instances without gaps, and also have
other desktop sounds playing in the meantime
- has many other benefits, even from a developer point of view (it's
easier to code with Pulseaudio APIs).
- esd was perfectly replaced, which is the main point. Esound apps works
for me out of the box. This is a big win, imho.

As for the interrupts sent to the soundcard, a module has been already
included in the upcoming 0.9.7 version that should fix that. AFAIK it's
because Pulseaudio plays silence when nobody uses it, to avoid popping
when a stream starts again, and due to something about the HAL module,

The only thing I must criticize is you saying that PA devs are stubborn.
It seems to me they're really trying to innovate a stagnating and
non-homogeneous field, and they should at least be treated with some
respect. "Stubborn" isn't the word I'd have chosen to describe them.

Anyway, even if PA isn't *THE* answer, ALSA isn't, either, for the
reasons already expressed in this thread. So, what do you purpose? I
think that fixing PA is easier than starting it again all over. Else, do
we need a Phonon-substitute for GNOME?

> I'm sorry for being the bad guy here, but someone has to say these
> things...

You're not the "bad guy". The point is: are you the *only* guy, even if
very vocal? I'd like to hear some more opinions from other people that
*don't* like Pulseaudio. 

C'mon, there ought to be some more on this list. Don't be shy. We need
the opinion of everybody (I'm talking serious, no sarcasm meant).

Matteo Settenvini
FSF Associated Member
Email : matteo member fsf org

Version: 3.12
GCS d--(-) s+:- a-- C++ UL+++ 
P?>++ L+++>$ E+>+++ W+++ N++ o? 
w--- O- M++ PS++ PE- Y+>++ 
PGP+++ t+ 5 X- R tv-- b+++ DI+ 
D++ G++ e h+ r-- y?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Questa =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=E8?= una parte del messaggio firmata digitalmente

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]