On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 20:43 +0100, Richard Spindler wrote:
> 2006/1/27, Lee Revell <rlrevell@email-addr-hidden-job.com>:
> > It's frustrating that most audio application writers STILL consider OSS
> > a sane default, it just waste's everyone's time (see also Skype). OSS
> > has been deprecated for years...
>
> Well, honestly I have to admit that I'm guilty of that too. why?
>
> Because of portaudio, it's propably on of the most convinient ways
> to use an audio API. And unfortunatly it only provides OSS in Version
> 18, which is what I use. I took a peek into v19, that has ALSA Support,
> but it became just too complex.
>
Um, I thought the whole point of portaudio is you don't write your
application to the OSS or ALSA API, you write to the PortAudio API and
don't have to worry about the low level sound system?
> The only alternative would be jack, but since I'm only doing simple
> applications, I don't need to run jack, and I do not expect my users to do
> so either.
>
> Writing against the native ALSA API is a pain, because it requires much
> more low level stuff, that I don't really care for. And on top of that it'd also
> require me to setup my own thread for the callback mechanism.
>
ALSA supports standard read/write access just like OSS.
> I guess I'm just to lazy. ;)
>
> -Richard
>
Received on Sat Jan 28 00:15:17 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Jan 28 2006 - 00:15:18 EET