Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] Re: [linux-audio-dev] laaga, round 2
From: Iain Sandoe (iain_AT_sandoe.co.uk)
Date: Wed May 09 2001 - 02:20:27 EEST
I'm with you almost 100% ... just have a couple a qualms ... and they are
probably misunderstandings... this thread has been tricky to follow (whilst
trying to work as well)...
I'm not sure how 'anonymous' channel allocation works if more than one app
(aka plug-in) is trying to co-operate.
> does that make it any clearer?
almost... could you do another summary slanted as below?
- in this case a real-world illustration of using the LAD elements to
replace VST/ASIO/ReWire with a "lad-virtual-studio".
... let's say two 24 channel cards, an HDR, an FX rack program, a FoH
console & a fold-back console... sounds like a reasonable set-up to record a
live gig no?
I don't yet understand how the app (plug-in) writers & users will see the
abstraction of the H/W & busses.
Physical connectivity of external (read H/W) interfaces and patching of
'soft' busses has to be presented to the user somehow.
Iain.
P.S. I remain of the opinion that more than one server instance *must* be
needed where there is more than one _unsynchronised_ H/W interface. This is
a trivial statement - providing the implementation (or design) does not
preclude it ;-)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed May 09 2001 - 02:56:43 EEST