Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> On Wed, 25 May 2016 11:40:27 -0400, Steve wrote in message
> <20160525114027.64eb3cbf@???>:
>
> > On Wed, 25 May 2016 07:56:57 +0200
> > <emninger@???> wrote:
> >
> > > Is pulseaudio necessary? As i understand it (and as i remember), it
> > > shouldn't be needed (in lubuntu at least in former times) it was not
> > > installed ... (?) But it's a long time i was away from Debian ...
> >
> > There's no Pulseaudio on my system. So I don't get centralized
> > individual volume controls for each of my sound sources. Boo hoo hoo
> > hoo hoo.
> >
> > When I need to use the Microsoft sabotaged Skype, which requires
> > Pulseaudio, I run it via apulse instead, and it works just fine. No
> > reason to use Pulseaudio itself.
> >
> > IMHO Alsa is sufficient.
> >
> > Once I built a Manjaro-OpenRC system with no Pulseaudio AND no Alsa.
> > Just OSS. Worked great, played Youtube videos just fine. I've never
> > again been able to do that.
>
> ..well, we're not exactly out of sound server options: ;o)
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_free_software_for_audio#Technologies
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Linux_audio_software#Sound_servers
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_server
>
> ..why not try https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JACK_Audio_Connection_Kit
> on ditching PulseAudio?
Because many audio applications aren't JACK compatible?
I think JACK is great, however to meet ordinary users'
needs, you would need an exotic configuration, something
like this:
Audio hardware <----> ALSA <----> JACK <----> ALSA virtual device <---> ALSA applications
^
\
\_____> JACK applications
Would be great to provide such a configuration out of the
box, but a reading or relevant web pages reveals
such a variety of options that I wonder if it can be
practical to support.
And where would OSS emulation come in?
If anyone is comtemplating detailed studies in this
area, I suggest they post to Linux Audio Users or Linux
Audio Developers mailing lists for authoritative comments.
Cheers,
--
Joel Roth