On Sat, 2010-11-27 at 21:26 +0800, Ng Oon-Ee wrote: > On Sat, 2010-11-27 at 11:55 +0000, Peter Lewis wrote: > > On Saturday 27 November 2010 06:30:36 Ng Oon-Ee wrote: > > > > >> Good to see the overwhelming positive lean; is pulse being considered > > > > >> for an eventual default by chance? > > > > > > > > > > Almost nothing is default on Arch... > > > > > > So you should ask Gnome. And the answer is that yes, it will be default > > > on Gnome. If you do not use Gnome, then only if the apps you pull need > > > it. > > > > Given that it's been said that if pulse is installed on your system and a > > program calls its client lib, then this starts the pulse server, which in turn > > takes over your whole sound system and forces everything else to use it (I'm > > paraphrasing, but that's what I understood), I for one would not like pulse to > > be a required dependency of anything. I'm not trying to troll, but that sounds > > like malware to me. > > > > Pete. > > In the various branches of this thread there's quite a few > misunderstandings of pulse. Not unexpected, but please remember that > hearsay isn't the same as actually trying to use something (and perhaps > understand it). > > You cannot (without quite a bit of effort) use pulseaudio and native > alsa. That is, don't use some apps using pulse and some not (I do, but > that's hackish, and its Jack not alsa). Similarly if you use nvidia you > cannot use neovoeu at the same time. Pulse handles audio, nvidia handles > your card. > > And the whole point of how pulseaudio is built in [testing] (libpulse > package) is that apps can be built with it (and drag libpulse in) but > will not need to use it, unless configured to do it. So no takeover for > those who AREN'T using it, which is part of what Jan asked for feedback > for (as Allan has replied already). > Thank you. Keep Pulse Audio optional. Please.
