On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 8:39 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <dominik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
This is supported by the zillions of forum messages asking how to fix or remove pulseaudio. Not to mention the billion post thread here on devel.
It's quite hypocritical of you to use an "anti-open-source" companyOn Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 15:24, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 29.07.09 06:48, Jeff Garzik (jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx) wrote:
>
> >
> > Karel Zak wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 10:07:32PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 28.07.09 15:48, Bill Nottingham (notting@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> >>> Yes. You cannot select them as record source, you cannot mute or
> >>> unmute them, you cannot change their volume. "CD", "PC Speaker",
> >>> "MIDI" and so on are just obsolete.
> >>
> >> This reminds me your note:
> >>
> >> https://tango.0pointer.de/pipermail/pulseaudio-discuss/2009-July/004519.html
> >>
> >> PA does not make use of hardware mixing. And I don't plan to change
> >> that. It's obsolete technology. CPUs these days come with extensions
> >> such as MMX or SSE precisely for speeding up DSP tasks such as PCM
> >> mixing. This is way more flexible that hw mixing, and definitely the
> >> way to the future, both on the desktop and on embedded envs as well.
> >>
> >>
> >> The "obsolete technology" -- who made this decision? Is it your private
> >> opinion or any suggestion from sound card manufacturers?
> >>
> >> It seems that HW companies still produce the "obsolete technology".
> >
> > Quite agreed [says a former kernel audio driver maintainer], and I will
> > go even farther:
>
> Maybe since the times you worked on audio drivers the design of the
> sound cards changed a little and stuff like SSE became largely available?
>
> > It is completely stupid to waste host CPU on a task that can be
> > offloaded in parallel to dedicated audio hardware.
> >
> > If the user intentionally purchased expensive audio hardware with nice
> > hardware mixing, do not subvert the user's intentions by ignoring such
> > nice hardware.
> >
> > Any developer who claims "always use software mixing" or "always use
> > hardware mixing" is a young, inexperienced fool. There are valid
> > situations for both choices.
>
> Hear hear, Mr. Garzik is the the old experienced wise man of audio,
> who knows so much more about audio than any of the audio guys at
> Microsoft or Apple.
(Creative) as an argument for not supporting hw mixing on one side
and then touting other "anti-open-source" companies as examples to
follow on the other.
But whatever. Just please stop imposing pulseaudio on those who don't
want to use it. For the record, I'm still considering leaving Fedora
because - as a GNOME desktop - it's becoming unusable without pulseaudio.
Making it a hard dependency for GNOME bluetooth stack in F11 went a bit
too far in my opinion.
Regards,
R.
This is supported by the zillions of forum messages asking how to fix or remove pulseaudio. Not to mention the billion post thread here on devel.
--
projecthuh.com
All of my bits are free, are yours? Fedoraproject.org
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
