Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] ALSA vs OSS/free
From: Nick D (nixx_AT_nixx.org.uk)
Date: Thu Mar 07 2002 - 21:36:49 EET
On Thu, 07 Mar 2002 12:44:24 -0500
Paul Davis <pbd_AT_Op.Net> wrote:
> >An "advantage" of OSS (not the free one) is that ther is e.g. e driver for sol
> >aris.
> >
> >For ALSA there is IMHO none. BTW does anyone know how difficult (work-intensiv
> >e) it
> >would be to port the ALSA API (user-space lib) using the solaris /dev/audio, /
> >dev/audioctl ?
>
> from a pure code perspective, alsa-lib could probably be ported to
> Solaris in a day or two, perhaps less. the problem is that it requires
> functionality from the kernel driver that may not be present for the
> Solaris /dev/audio* stuff. OTOH, abramo has joked (quite seriously)
> that it might be possible to have alsa-lib support OSS, in which case
> your problem would be solved.
heh. Imagine they _did_ port it.. we'd have to come up with a new word to replace the "Linux" in ALSA... ;-)
But seriously, i've always thought it was a shame ALSA is tied to one platform. I mean sure, i only use linux, but i still like the idea of any apps i write working under many posix-like systems... Ive wondered how hard it would be to port the kernel-level stuff to another platform (don't shout! ive not done driver programming!)
> however, who would bother to do the work?
quite. especially since linux is capturing most of the unix market share (esp. on the desktop). ALSA on MacOS X anyone? or dare i say Win**?
:-O
nick
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Mar 07 2002 - 21:28:09 EET