Linked by Jordan Spencer Cunningham on Wed 19th Aug 2009 20:54 UTC
Linux The Linux Foundation has made some analyzation the past two years into just how much code is being added to the project and who is doing that contribution. This year's report is out, and the results are actually quite smile-worthy if you're a Linux advocate: the increase in code contributions is phenomenal, the rate at which these contributions are being submitted is faster, and there are more individual developers than previously.
Permalink for comment 379608
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
d3vi1
Member since:
2006-01-28

I think pulseaudio wouldn't be necessary if ALSA was better, why not put the pulseaudio functionality in the core, on the audio stack where it should be, and let programs communicate over a simple API, instead of relying on 10,000 different APIs for outputting audio.


Do you remember the days in which there was only 1 API? The OSS? Today it's open source and we still don't use it on Linux. It supports everything that we need including 5.1, S/PDIF passthrought and the rest and the best thing is that it's also supported on all UNIX like OS's (FreeBSD, OpenSolaris, etc.).
Furthermore, it's the _ONLY_ API that looks like a UNIX API. fopen(/dev/dsp) and you're set. [/q]
There are currently only 2 reasons two use another sound API:

1) Jackd for stuff such as Rivendell (for radio stations). Nothing beats the patchbay that Jack offers you, but that's only required for a few things.

2) Networked stuff. If I remotely login and I have a fiber at my disposal, the sound system should follow my X11 session.

For anything else the OSS API is perfect.

Please note the use of the word API next to OSS. I am not sure which implementation is best between ALSA and OSS, but I know that the OSS API is my personal favorite. Maybe we can keep the ALSA drivers and still use the OSS API.

Reply Parent Score: 3