Fri, 18 Feb 2011 09:42:26 -0500 письмо от Paul Davis <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > 2011/2/17 Mike Cookson <cook60020tmp@xxxxxxx>: > > > > > There is not mistake. Each way has advantages and disadvantages. As for > me - when i work with pro audio software, i don't like to lost jack-less > applications, like web browser. > > I think you missed my point. I didn't say that you should lose audio > from such applications. I said that introducing a layer of the > complexity of PulseAudio in order to do this, when there are other > options available seems like a mistake to me. I cited my specific case > where I listen to a variety of non-JACK-aware audio applications all > day, via JACK, but without using PulseAudio because I don't need any > of the (fairly cool) PulseAudio features or its complications. Yep, probably, it is not necessary very much, since there is jack backend for alsa. But objects and ports, it creates, have useless names. If two or more alsa apps are started, and then i launch patchbay, i can't associate them with apps. For some apps i don't need to have ports in patchbay at all, and connecting them to pulseaudio has value. jack2-simple-config utility, shipped with kxstudio, allowes to disable pulseaudio at all, though i have it - just to be safe :] (of course, not as alsa-to-jack bridge... just to be safe) _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
