Re: [LAU] perhaps why some of us have more trouble w/ pulseaudio than others (ICE1712/M-audio delta problem w/ pulseaudio)

From: david <gnome@email-addr-hidden>
Date: Mon May 10 2010 - 12:41:32 EEST

rosea.grammostola wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-05-09 at 23:34 -1000, david wrote:
>> Ng Oon-Ee wrote:
>>> On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 3:52 PM, Hartmut Noack <zettberlin@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
>>>> This musing about "broken" alsa-drivers that need to be "fixed" in the
>>>> thread at PA increases the bad feeling about PA's relation and awarenes
>>>> to pro-audio.
>>>>
>>>> best regs
>>>> HZN
>>> PA is specifically for 'desktop' usage, pro-audio isn't a part of
>>> that. If you're doing pro-audio you'd be running JACK anyway. I
>>> struggle to understand why a user would want PA, with all the inherent
>>> latency concerns (compared to JACK) to control their pro-audio
>>> soundcard.
>> Perhaps Pulse really just wants to get rid of JACK in the first place?
>
> ???

Replace JACK entirely with Pulse, become the only audio server game in
town? ;-)

-- 
David
gnome@email-addr-hidden
authenticity, honesty, community
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Received on Mon May 10 16:15:03 2010

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon May 10 2010 - 16:15:03 EEST