Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Still I cannot understand why...
From: Jussi Laako (jussi.laako_AT_kolumbus.fi)
Date: Tue Dec 18 2001 - 00:43:55 EET
Mark Constable wrote:
>
> Huh ! Maybe you would prefer it if ALSA never made it into
> the kernel but that just propogates the current retard
> situation we have with OSS for the rest of us.
Nope, I support both OSS and ALSA (in fact 0.5 _and_ 0.9) in my software.
But I don't like idea of API that keeps changing and gets rewritten all the
time. I'd like to spend more time developing the code that does something
useful and less time on rewriting HAL.
> I *want* to see *some* harware encouraged to be opened up
> (to avoid anything like this scenario in the future) and
> accepting NDAs from a few uncooperative manufacturers just
> extends the problem.
Where can I download hardware specs for the RME Hammerfall series so that I
can write some own code for it? It's not available at ALSA site. Why?
> The insidious part is that as long as this half-arsed OSS
> audio device is around, at all, then it inhibits truly
> open developement of the overall Linux audio interface.
I haven't had any problems with OSS and my audio hardware. I've spent much
more time trying to get ALSA installed, configured and my application
support for it working.
My problems with ALSA:
1) Poor documentation
2) Difficult installation and configuration (not for me, but for users of my
software)
3) Constantly changing API (required lots of changes to my code 0.5 -> 0.9)
4) Currently supports only Linux. (required: FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD,
Solaris, HP-UX, AIX and IRIX (I know, OSS doesn't support IRIX either))
I _don't_ like to support single OS API's, it reminds me too much about
Win... One of the main reasons for writing support for ALSA was that QNX has
ALSA API. So it's not single platform API, but almost.
- Jussi Laako
-- PGP key fingerprint: 161D 6FED 6A92 39E2 EB5B 39DD A4DE 63EB C216 1E4B Available at PGP keyservers
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Dec 18 2001 - 00:39:17 EET