Re: [LAU] Lash compatibility...

[James <everamzah@xxxxxxxxx>]

i second that. i have been going thru a lot of source code (i have it all on my hd anyway, so might as well) in the hopes of picking up on how to program. strange place to start i know. but important programs like ghostess (which i realize isn't meant to be a full-blown dssi host, but is the best "simple" option atm) really need to be lash compliant in order to be fully usable.

of course, a wishlist could go on for ages so i'll stfu ;)

On 5/17/07, James Stone <jamesmstone@xxxxxxxxx > wrote:

Just wondered if anyone has considered adding Lash compatibility
to ghostess? It would really make seq24 an even more amazing
program than it is already....

It is a shame more linux audio apps have not picked up on lash.
IMHO it is one of the key things preventing linux audio from
steaming ahead of the competition..

I would be more than happy to put in time to help with this, if
there is anything I can do.. I am afraid my c skills are rather
poor though, and I would not know where to start with this,
unless someone could point me to some nice example code!

Anyway, please don't read this post as moaning. It is just
written with the earnest hope of improving the situation with
linux audio.

James
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-user

-- 
james/everamzah
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-user