Re: GNOME 2 Sound Architecture and APIs?

[Erik Jarvi <ejarvi megsinet net>]

On Sat, Apr 14, 2001 at 09:59:37AM -0400, Alan Cox wrote:
> > playing mp3s".  For this limited domain of desktop applications, 
> > it works ok.  It really needs a resampling overhaul (borrow one 
> > from a decent MOD player, GPL rules), and portions of the 
> > implementation are total crap (passing sockets, etc.).  This is
> > not meant to be an exhaustive list of problems with esd, just 
> > the most pathetic ones.
> 
> I think you hit most of the critical ones there. 
> 
> > I claim that for 99.999% of the average desktop users (i.e. not
> > audio power users), esound is "good enough", especially if a
> 
> Here I have to disagree

I'm not sure what you are saying here. Are you saying that esd is good enough
for everyone, or we should have a sound daemon that is up to snuff for audio
power users? (I'd agree on the latter if the daemon only does what you describe
below.) Which leads to what is the goal of audio in GNOME? the ability to have
support for the $1k to $10k audio apps/hardware (pipe dream?) or just for the
"hobbiest".

> A sound daemon really has two jobs to do. One is to play sounds the other
> is to arbitrate resources. What I mean by that is given 4 channels of
> audio there is a role to play deciding who gets channels. Thus you might
> want to give a channel to quake to use raw, keep one for beeps and boings
> and hand the other two out to apps as needed. That implies apps giving a lot
> more info when they ask for an audio channel.
 
> The other thing it lacks is synchronization. That problem is an important one
> that won't go away

I thought it was my incompetence to configure audio. Whew! :)

Erik
-- 
All music aspires to the condition of muzak.