On Thursday 01 June 2017 01:10:08 Tanu Kaskinen wrote: > On Wed, 2017-05-31 at 09:30 +0200, Pali Rohár wrote: > > On Wednesday 31 May 2017 07:00:54 Arun Raghavan wrote: > > > On Sun, 28 May 2017, at 08:05 PM, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > > On Thursday 25 May 2017 10:36:36 Luiz Augusto von Dentz wrote: > > > > > BlueZ 4 is no longer supported by BlueZ community for a long long > > > > > time, also by moving to BlueZ 5 it should make it even more clearer > > > > > that BlueZ 4 is no longer an option. > > > > > > > > It is a really big problem to have working bluez4 code in puleaudio? > > > > > > As Luiz points out, it's been a while since BlueZ 4 was current. Is > > > there a reason you ask about keeping support for it around? > > > > I'm still using it. > > > > > While it might seem like there is no cost to just keeping the code > > > around, each time we add code, either it is BlueZ 5 only, or there's > > > overhead to make sure it builds and/or works on a BlueZ 4 setup. > > > > bluex4 is still in use and I do not think it is a good idea to do some > > version lock for particular software version if there are still users. > > Why are people still using bluez4? I understand that some long-term > support operating systems may still have bluez4, but they will keep > using an old version of pulseaudio too. Sailfish OS was the last > operating system that I know of that kept using bluez4 for a long time > while upgrading other system components, but they too have moved on to > bluez5 now. Is there still some distribution that will use (or would > like to use) pulseaudio 11 with bluez4? What distribution are you > using? Debian wheezy has bluez4. But I do not know if some distribution is going to use bluez4 + new pulseaudio by default. Personally I'm using combination of bluez4 + new pulseaudio (compiled from source) as bluez4 and bluez5 are not API compatible (so bluez4 cannot be replaced by bluez5 without breaking whole system), but new pulseaudio has better bluetooth support... -- Pali Rohár pali.rohar at gmail.com
