30.05.2014 18:01, Tanu Kaskinen wrote: > On Wed, 2014-05-28 at 14:30 +0600, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote: >> 28.05.2014 12:08, Jay Sorg wrote: >>> I don't want a TCP or UDP connection for each session or a confusing >>> sink or source name. >> >> module-esound-sink works with unix-domain sockets, too, and allows >> overriding the sink name. The problem is that there is no >> module-esound-source, but it is solvable in theory (although I am not >> sure if module-esound-source would be accepted if one submits it). > > Don't worry about the acceptability of module-esound-source. If we need > a source for xrdp anyway, it doesn't matter if its implemented by using > the esound protocol or some custom xrdp protocol. Or is there some > reason why module-esound-source would be somehow significantly more evil > than module-esound-sink? There is no such reason against module-esound-source. -- Alexander E. Patrakov
