Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] LAAGA vs ALSA ... silent for a while
From: Abramo Bagnara (abramo_AT_alsa-project.org)
Date: Tue Jun 26 2001 - 08:47:53 EEST
Benno Senoner wrote:
>
> On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, you wrote:
> > >
> > > I want LAAGA working on OSS/Free , OSS too.
> > > That's one of the reasons why I do prefer keeping it separate.
> >
> > A backend for OSS is scheduled (although low priority).
>
> That's not an option.
> Many developers (including me) do not have the time to keep up with
> the development version of ALSA.
> This is why I prefer Paul Davis' approach: you can use the audio i/o API
> you like without being tied to ALSA.
> (I do agree with Vincent's last mail too)
I was referring to ALSA API not ALSA implementation.
> > > Plus: Abramo can you tell us what kind of advantages an integration
> > > of LAAGA into ALSA would bring us ?
> >
> > See the neverending thread on lad.
>
> Please summarize the advantages in a few sentences.
> (the old LAAGA threads are way too diluted, we want the juice please)
I'm *very* short of time currently.
> > > Keep in mind that #1 priority is that lowlatency must be assured at any cost.
> > > It's very easy to screw up latencies.
> > >
> > > I think that if ALSA does "too much" without the user knowing what is doing is
> > > dangerous in some ways. (but I could be wrong)
> >
> > You're ;-)
>
> Prove it please.
Ditto, but you may see this reading the source.
-- Abramo Bagnara mailto:abramo_AT_alsa-project.orgOpera Unica Phone: +39.546.656023 Via Emilia Interna, 140 48014 Castel Bolognese (RA) - Italy
ALSA project http://www.alsa-project.org It sounds good!
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Jun 26 2001 - 08:50:56 EEST