Re: Is it time for remove (crap) ALSA from kernel tree ?

Takashi Iwai
2007-06-25T10:58:18Z

At Mon, 25 Jun 2007 11:51:59 +0200 (CEST),
Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
>
> On Sun, 24 Jun 2007, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> >> Sory Alan but I don't want philosophical/historical discuss.
> >> Try to answer on question "ALSA or OSS ?" using *only* technical arguments.
> >
> > We dropped OSS for ALSA for technical reasons. Those being that ALSA
> > - has a better audio API
>
> How better and where better ?
> Please be more verbose :>
>
> > - is more flexible
>
> Yes .. if you have API with thin abstracttion (like ALSA has) theoreticaly
> you can do more but also by lack of some abstraction normal/usual things
> must be implemented in harder way. This was theory .. pracice is completly
> diffrent because some applications still provides better soud support
> (without interruption) when uses OSS emulation placed on top ALSA layer
> than compiled for direct use ALSA API.
>
> Sound it in not rocket science. In 99.9% cases you need well abstracted
> API which ALSA doe not provide and this is real cause why so poor sound
> support in Linux applications is. Thin ALSA abstraction is main cause of
> avalaibability "tons" of additional soud user space APIs.

I disagree about this. Tons of various user-space APIs would be
created anyway. It's the nature of FOSS developemnt.

Takashi