Re: [linux-audio-dev] Still I cannot understand why...

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Still I cannot understand why...
From: Mark Constable (markc_AT_renta.net)
Date: Mon Dec 17 2001 - 15:58:30 EET


On Mon, 17 Dec 2001 20:43, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
> [OSS bashing and backwards compatibility]

or, desperately seeking ALSA and looking to the future!

> ok, guys, everybody hates OSS, *BUT*:
>
> * it is a common denominator among many unices, and it works well
> for trivial applications. think portability.

Why ? I use Linux, this list is linux-audio-devel.

The only good thing, to me, about "other unices" is that
apple had a choice and chose BSD.

> * thanks to oss, many of the excellent composer tools from the next
> and sgi world have percolated through to linux way back when the
> linux audio scene was far less evolved and far more desolate than it
> is now. think critical mass here.

There are no "critical mass (appeal)" apps anywhere that
I've seen. Please don't offer csound and PD as having any
sort of "mass appeal", they may be fine tools for those
who want them but the regular muso I'm aware of primarily
want a Cubase which they don't have to boot into windows
to use nor hang around pirate sites hoping to get a later
fixed version thereof.

My main point is that the usage of OSS has held up development
of what will inevitably become a replacement for it anyway.

> * it is apparently easier to program than alsa in its current state
> of documentation, although that may change in the future. but it is
> far more appealing to newbies than alsa. again think critcal mass
> here.

That attitude just extends the life of a dead-end system.
I would consider it a great disservice to encourage anyone
to "start using" OSS based code, especially at this stage
of the game... 1/2 a year ago... maybe.

> i do agree that many closed-source OSS drivers are overpriced crap,
> but then you don't need to use them. it's up to the oss folks what
> they do with their work and how they make their living.
> i like linus' attitude in that respect: everybody decides about the
> licensing of their own code. if it's not free, stop whining and
> write your own.

I say linus blew it on this issue but then it does not
seem that anything to do with multimedia is on his event
horizon so it's also not surprising. Allowing the inclusion
of any part of the kernel that cannot be truly adopted by
the community as a whole, because it is really "owned" by
a commercial company at the mercy of it's owners and share
holders, will lead to a distorted growth path. To me, audio
on Linux has been an absolutely classic example of this.

Scenario: I guess there are OSS specific mailing-lists
somewhat like LAD but how can any open source type biggot
possibly contribute patches and input to that stream when
he feels the guts of any good suggestions and his good
efforts will end up in the for-sale version of the
"product" before it ever dribbles thru to the kernel ?

Sure, you can screw some positives out of what OSS has done
for Linux, but to me, at the end of the day, it's swamped
by a bunch of more compelling negatives.

> i also agree that oss fails to meet but the most basic requirements,
> but then again, oss does fine for 99.999% of all linux users (i.e.
> those that want to hear "ping" when they've got new mail).

Guess what... that is _all_ most of them can do, aside
from play mp3s... why ? What is at the core of the lack
of ability to do anything else ?

Buy a commercial OSS driver perhaps ? Sure, can do. Got
a problem ? ...oops, no code, no CVS, no bug reporting, no
support lists... no community! Years later... still nothing.

> but however evil oss may be, i think hannu savolainen (sp ?)
> deserves at least a little credit for pioneering a common unix audio
> layer before we condemn him to eternal torment. don't you think ?

No (and no comment because I won't be drawn into
   saying anything negative about him personally)

BTW I've never suggested OSS is "evil", just no longer
desirable or benefical to the state of audio on Linux and
any further usage of it inteferes with getting ALSA fully
up to spec and in the kernel... even asap. By far and away
the majority of users here have to ADD the ALSA modules to
their standard kernel builds. That sux, not OSS in itself.

IMOO (in my opinion only)

> ;)

Yes, I agree, more smilies all 'round :-)

--markc


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Mon Dec 17 2001 - 15:57:01 EET