On Thu, 2004-10-28 at 15:25 -0400, Alan Cox wrote: > On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 02:23:56PM -0400, John (J5) Palmieri wrote: > > Polyaudio so I am going to go ahead and make some packages. It looks > > like I might have to split out a libesound package for now. The biggest > > problem from what Jeff said would be converting all our packages to use > > Polyaudio's API. > > The biggest problem would be the security audit and the debugging, especially > the audit. That is 500Kb of uncommented, impenetrable spaghetti. I hadn't gotten to the point of looking at the code yet. I was going to make some test packages, see how it worked as an esd replacement and then go ahead and start looking at it. If it is as you say, impenetrable spaghetti, then I don't want to gain yet another unmaintainable package. Is it your position that the things that are wrong with Polyaudio would be harder to fix than just fixing esd? Or perhaps there are better alternatives around? If we can find a solution that is easy to integrate, maintain and audit I am all for that. -- John (J5) Palmieri Associate Software Engineer Desktop Group Red Hat, Inc. Blog: http://martianrock.com
