On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 18:44 -0400, Isaac Dupree wrote: > On 05/18/10 18:25, Jan Steffens wrote: > > I could make PulseAudio installation significantly easier by putting > > specially-built packages (e.g. sdl-pulse, openal-pulse) into > > [community] and grouping them in a "pulse" group. > > > > This group would also include a "pulse-asoundrc" package containing a > > pulse-configured asound.conf, as well as depending on alsa-plugins. > > > > Should I go ahead with this? Any suggestions? > > Sounds neat! (disclaimer: i haven't used PA on Arch, only on Ubuntu in > the past.) Question: OK this would make it easy to transition *to* a > PulseAudio based system, but suppose I later decide I don't like it-- is > it easy to transition back to a non-PA system?(wait, it's trivial if > those packages don't conflict with 'sdl' etc. -- do they?) > > also I wonder why the group name to be "pulse" and not "pulseaudio". The only thing this would make simpler is not requiring user-compilation (and the packages must conflict with sdl/openal I believe, in most cases). I'd be happy with this if only for the reason that I wouldn't have to wait for the REALLY slow mplayer downloads to compile mplayer-pulse. You may have difficulty selecting which packages though (would gnome-media-pulse qualify?).
