Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] Using Alsa in stead of OSS ?
From: Chris Majewski (majewski_AT_cs.ubc.ca)
Date: Tue Oct 23 2001 - 23:18:24 EEST
I originally got ALSA because I had a SB16 which would not do
full-duplex under OSS/Free. In the end it turned out the SB16's
full-duplex is bogus: one of the channels is 8bit. So I now have the
ens1371, which has been treating me well.
In any case, I've always built ALSA from source, and I would recommend
you do the same. I've got Debian/woody as well, and basically none of
the sound stuff I use has made it there yet. Which is fine.
Even if you're not a hacker-type, you may find that compiling stuff is
not that scary or time-consuming.
Basically ./configure && make && su -c 'make install' does the job in
most cases. In addition to giving you the latest version, building
from source gives you more control over the configuration. I've found
that to actually *simplify* things in many cases, as compared to
installing a pre-compiled package. Sometimes the INSTALL or README
file in a source distribution will give you a good quick-and-dirty
lowdown on the options, which may be hard to find in the documentation
that comes with the debian package or whatever.
-chris
Vincent Touquet <vincent_AT_ulyssis.org> writes:
> Hi, I own a simple stupid ens1371 card.
> Is there any advantage on installing alsa instead of the native OSS kernel drivers ?
>
> Alsa oss compatibility is not yet working in debian-woody and I'm kind of sick of not being able to use all audio apps I want to, so i was thinking of just using the es1371.o module supplied with the kernel.
>
> Would I be missing something ? Do I really need Alsa cvs ?
>
> regards
> vini
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Oct 23 2001 - 23:13:25 EEST