[arch-general] Is there a clean solution to get completely rid of Pulseaudio?
Hi :)
people told me that Arch Linux will not force me to install PA. Today I continued to set up my Arch Linux. A cold still hinder me to work very long on my computer, so until now Google didn't help me to find an easy solution to get rid of PA. Arch Linux on my machine does force me to install PA to keep the system consistent.
I found this information: https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=998489#p998489
I already read tons of irrelevant comments similar to https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=998290#p998290
Even no information on https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pro_Audio
I like using Google and reading Wikis, in spite of my dyslexia. I don't like to read tons of irrelevant stuff to find out, that in the end there's no clean solution.
Is there a clean solution to get completely rid of PA?
PA for my needs is absolutely obstructive.
I try to set up a DAW using two Terratec EWX 24/96 for MIDI only (but both are audio devices too) and for audio a RME HDSPe. The only thing PA will do for me, is causing trouble.
IIRC on Debian I got rid of PA by replacing 2 packages by empty dummy packages, then everything was ok. I figured this out my self. Btw. for Debian it was the same, people told me that Debian doesn't force to use PA, but it does.
Since I'm new to Arch Linux I need some information. May I ask where I get the needed information to completely once and for all get rid of PA?
TIA,
Ralf
PS: There are reasons to get rid of PA. The "installing PA isn't absolutely obstructive" crowd might use Google, IIRC there e.g. was the description of an issue in an Ubuntu Studio mailing list this month.
On 12/23/2011 10:41 AM, Ralf Madorf wrote:
Hi :)
people told me that Arch Linux will not force me to install PA. Today I continued to set up my Arch Linux. A cold still hinder me to work very long on my computer, so until now Google didn't help me to find an easy solution to get rid of PA. Arch Linux on my machine does force me to install PA to keep the system consistent.
can you clarify that you are talking about pulseaudio and not about libpulse?
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 11:17 +0200, Ionut Biru wrote:
can you clarify that you are talking about pulseaudio and not about libpulse?
# pacman -Rss pulseaudio checking dependencies... error: failed to prepare transaction (could not satisfy dependencies) :: gnome-settings-daemon: requires pulseaudio :: pulseaudio-alsa: requires pulseaudio
I believe you have to remove each package that pulseaudio depends on. You can reinstall them after.
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 4:25 AM, Ralf Madorf ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.netwrote:
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 11:17 +0200, Ionut Biru wrote:
can you clarify that you are talking about pulseaudio and not about libpulse?
# pacman -Rss pulseaudio checking dependencies... error: failed to prepare transaction (could not satisfy dependencies) :: gnome-settings-daemon: requires pulseaudio :: pulseaudio-alsa: requires pulseaudio
On 12/23/2011 11:25 AM, Ralf Madorf wrote:
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 11:17 +0200, Ionut Biru wrote:
can you clarify that you are talking about pulseaudio and not about libpulse?
# pacman -Rss pulseaudio checking dependencies... error: failed to prepare transaction (could not satisfy dependencies) :: gnome-settings-daemon: requires pulseaudio :: pulseaudio-alsa: requires pulseaudio
ok then, gnome requires pulseaudio. The only way to get rid of pulseaudio is to get rid of gnome.
You could do that by doing pacman -Rsc pulseaudio .. but be extremely careful with that command. It deletes everything recursively down (cascading as man pacman puts it).
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 4:27 AM, Ionut Biru ibiru@archlinux.org wrote:
On 12/23/2011 11:25 AM, Ralf Madorf wrote:
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 11:17 +0200, Ionut Biru wrote:
can you clarify that you are talking about pulseaudio and not about libpulse?
# pacman -Rss pulseaudio checking dependencies... error: failed to prepare transaction (could not satisfy dependencies) :: gnome-settings-daemon: requires pulseaudio :: pulseaudio-alsa: requires pulseaudio
ok then, gnome requires pulseaudio. The only way to get rid of pulseaudio is to get rid of gnome.
-- Ionuț
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 04:29 -0500, Jonathan Vasquez wrote:
You could do that by doing pacman -Rsc pulseaudio .. but be extremely careful with that command. It deletes everything recursively down (cascading as man pacman puts it).
I know this command, but this won't solve the issue, that PA on Arch Linux is a dependency for software that don't need PA. I want a clean solution.
- Ralf
Am Fri, 23 Dec 2011 10:53:56 +0100 schrieb Ralf Madorf ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net:
I know this command, but this won't solve the issue, that PA on Arch Linux is a dependency for software that don't need PA. I want a clean solution.
Run pacman -Qi pulseaudio to see what package(s) forces you to install PA. As far as I know it's actually common policy in Arch Linux that PA is only optional and nobody is at least forced to use it.
If there are applications which depend on PA and can't work without PA then you have, of course, the choice between installing and using PA or uninstalling the reverse dependency. But in such a case you have to blame upstream, but not Arch Linux.
And it probably can happen that the package maintainer made a mistake by adding pulseaudio to depends instead of optdepends. In this case you should file a bug report or write a comment to AUR.
Heiko
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 11:13 +0100, Heiko Baums wrote:
Am Fri, 23 Dec 2011 10:53:56 +0100 schrieb Ralf Madorf ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net:
I know this command, but this won't solve the issue, that PA on Arch Linux is a dependency for software that don't need PA. I want a clean solution.
Run pacman -Qi pulseaudio to see what package(s) forces you to install PA.
I run this before I posted my request [1]. I also know that I can compile gnome-settings-daemon, see the links of my first mail. But at another time, when I e.g. install GNOME, then other packages will install PA. GNOME doesn't need PA, if you use it the way I will use all DEs, since I'll use jack, no desktop sound, no Skype etc., just pro and consumer multimedia apps, flashplayer. There hopefully is a way to fake that PA is installed.
- Ralf
[1] # pacman -Qi pulseaudio Name : pulseaudio Version : 1.1-1 URL : http://pulseaudio.org/ Licenses : GPL LGPL Groups : None Provides : None Depends On : libpulse=1.1-1 rtkit libtool speex tdb udev fftw orc libsamplerate Optional Deps : avahi: zeroconf support bluez: bluetooth support gconf: configuration through gconf (paprefs) jack: jack support lirc-utils: infra-red support openssl: RAOP support python2-pyqt: Equalizer GUI (qpaeq) Required By : gnome-settings-daemon pulseaudio-alsa Conflicts With : None Replaces : None Installed Size : 5456.00 K Packager : Jan Alexander Steffens (heftig) jan.steffens@gmail.com Architecture : x86_64 Build Date : Thu 20 Oct 2011 05:26:48 PM CEST Install Date : Sat 10 Dec 2011 04:13:41 PM CET Install Reason : Installed as a dependency for another package Install Script : Yes Description : A featureful, general-purpose sound server
On Friday 23 Dec 2011 11:45:23 Ralf Madorf wrote:
I'll use jack, no desktop sound, no Skype etc., just pro and consumer multimedia apps, flashplayer. There hopefully is a way to fake that PA is installed.
Hi Ralph,
I have no idea if this will work for you but try this:
1) Create an empty directory. 2) Create a file named PKGBUILD inside that directory, with the following content:
pkgname=pulseaudio-dummy pkgver=1.0 pkgrel=1 pkgdesc="A dummy packages that pretends to provide pulseaudio." arch=('any') url="" license=('BSD') provides=('pulseaudio') conflicts=('pulseaudio') source=()
3) At the command-line, in that directory, type:
# makepkg # pacman -U *.pkg.*
(You may need to use "sudo" for that last command, or switch to root first using "su -".)
This should install a package named "pulseaudio-dummy", which contains absolutely nothing, but claims that it satisfies the dependency "pulseaudio". This *might* fix your problem, but it might also cause GNOME to crash. I don't use GNOME, and I don't know enough about its dependency on pulseaudio to be certain what will happen.
I hope this helps, Paul
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 10:56 +0000, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
On Friday 23 Dec 2011 11:45:23 Ralf Madorf wrote:
I'll use jack, no desktop sound, no Skype etc., just pro and consumer multimedia apps, flashplayer. There hopefully is a way to fake that PA is installed.
Hi Ralph,
I have no idea if this will work for you but try this:
- Create an empty directory.
- Create a file named PKGBUILD inside that directory, with the following
content:
pkgname=pulseaudio-dummy pkgver=1.0 pkgrel=1 pkgdesc="A dummy packages that pretends to provide pulseaudio." arch=('any') url="" license=('BSD') provides=('pulseaudio') conflicts=('pulseaudio') source=()
- At the command-line, in that directory, type:
# makepkg # pacman -U *.pkg.*
(You may need to use "sudo" for that last command, or switch to root first using "su -".)
This should install a package named "pulseaudio-dummy", which contains absolutely nothing, but claims that it satisfies the dependency "pulseaudio". This *might* fix your problem, but it might also cause GNOME to crash. I don't use GNOME, and I don't know enough about its dependency on pulseaudio to be certain what will happen.
I hope this helps, Paul
Thank you Paul :)
I flagged your reply and will test this ASAP.
Cheers!
Ralf
you can't use gnome 3 without pulse audio. if you don't want to use pulse audio, consider using another DE or WM.
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 13:02 +0330, ali.mousavi@gmail.com wrote:
you can't use gnome 3 without pulse audio. if you don't want to use pulse audio, consider using another DE or WM.
At the moment I'm using Xfce only, but I will have the libre to use GNOME3 too, since it works without PA. It did work without PA for my Debian.
As mentioned before, at the moment only GDM is installed.
Btw. for what tasks PA is needed? I don't know any task that's relevant for a DAW. But having the libre to use every DE for a DAW should be possible.
- Ralf
2011/12/23 Ralf Madorf ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net:
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 13:02 +0330, ali.mousavi@gmail.com wrote:
you can't use gnome 3 without pulse audio. if you don't want to use pulse audio, consider using another DE or WM.
At the moment I'm using Xfce only, but I will have the libre to use GNOME3 too, since it works without PA. It did work without PA for my Debian.
s/libre/freedom
So stick with debian.
As mentioned before, at the moment only GDM is installed.
Which is the dm of gnome.
Btw. for what tasks PA is needed? I don't know any task that's relevant for a DAW. But having the libre to use every DE for a DAW should be possible.
libre is french term for freedom. As it is said before : stick with debian, and stop spamming this list, for god sake !
- Ralf
On Friday 23 Dec 2011 10:57:40 Ralf Madorf wrote:
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 13:02 +0330, ali.mousavi@gmail.com wrote:
you can't use gnome 3 without pulse audio. if you don't want to use pulse audio, consider using another DE or WM.
At the moment I'm using Xfce only, but I will have the libre to use GNOME3 too, since it works without PA. It did work without PA for my Debian.
As mentioned before, at the moment only GDM is installed.
Then as Ali says, just use a different DM. There are several to choose from:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Display_Manager
And if you want to, file a bug report upstream about the dependency on pulse.
Pete.
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 10:17 +0000, Peter Lewis wrote:
And if you want to, file a bug report upstream about the dependency on pulse.
As others already pointed out. It's not a bug regarding to Arch packages, but the policy of GNOME3 to make it the default sound sever. OTOH here should be a possibility to fake this dependency, since this won't break GNOME for pro-audio usage, while PA tend to cause issues for pro-audio.
To whom should I file a bug report, resp. a my wish?
- Ralf
On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 11:57:11 +0100 Ralf Madorf ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net wrote:
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 10:17 +0000, Peter Lewis wrote:
And if you want to, file a bug report upstream about the dependency on pulse.
As others already pointed out. It's not a bug regarding to Arch packages, but the policy of GNOME3 to make it the default sound sever. OTOH here should be a possibility to fake this dependency, since this won't break GNOME for pro-audio usage, while PA tend to cause issues for pro-audio.
To whom should I file a bug report, resp. a my wish?
- Ralf
If you want to be even considered there, I suggest you rethink your position. Bug reports like "change PA to ALSA because I hate the former" are not constructive since they imply that devs are morons and made a bad choice. Can you suggest something better? I don't think so.
Pulseaudio is a pretty good piece of software with very precise goals. DEs strive to provide the best user experience possible, that's why gnome devs chose PA. If you don't want PA don't use gnome.
If I were you, I would look into recompiling gdb/whatever w/o PA support...
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 09:44 -0600, Leonid Isaev wrote:
Can you suggest something better? I don't think so.
Yes, jackd would be much better. Pulseaudio is an unlucky choice. If there's no PA installed and people don't wish to handle jackd, ALSA already is able to do all what's needed. What was bad with e.g. arts?
For some people PA is an advantage, for other people it's an disadvantage. What's bad with enabling those who prefer PA to install it and for those who can't use PA to enable not to install PA?
Why is there this go/no-go type?
- Ralf
On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 19:03:16 +0100 Ralf Madorf ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net wrote:
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 09:44 -0600, Leonid Isaev wrote:
Can you suggest something better? I don't think so.
Yes, jackd would be much better. Pulseaudio is an unlucky choice. If there's no PA installed and people don't wish to handle jackd, ALSA already is able to do all what's needed. What was bad with e.g. arts?
Comparing jack and PA is something like comparing gnome and xfce. You can read about the differences at jackd homepage.
PA, jack, aRTS, esd, gstreamer -- developers select whatever they are comfortable with; any choice will leave someone unpleased...
For some people PA is an advantage, for other people it's an disadvantage. What's bad with enabling those who prefer PA to install it and for those who can't use PA to enable not to install PA?
Why is there this go/no-go type?
Exactly, that's why the common approach to packaging is to enable as much functionality as possible. Don't like it -- use ABS. Otherwise we can argue why xfce needs gstreamer, qemu-kvm needs bluez, and so on...
- Ralf
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 12:17 -0600, Leonid Isaev wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 19:03:16 +0100 Ralf Madorf ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net wrote:
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 09:44 -0600, Leonid Isaev wrote:
Can you suggest something better? I don't think so.
Yes, jackd would be much better. Pulseaudio is an unlucky choice. If there's no PA installed and people don't wish to handle jackd, ALSA already is able to do all what's needed. What was bad with e.g. arts?
Comparing jack and PA is something like comparing gnome and xfce. You can read about the differences at jackd homepage.
I'm Linux audio user since around 9 years, I know Jack ;).
PA, jack, aRTS, esd, gstreamer -- developers select whatever they are comfortable with; any choice will leave someone unpleased...
For some people PA is an advantage, for other people it's an disadvantage. What's bad with enabling those who prefer PA to install it and for those who can't use PA to enable not to install PA?
Why is there this go/no-go type?
Exactly, that's why the common approach to packaging is to enable as much functionality as possible. Don't like it -- use ABS. Otherwise we can argue why xfce needs gstreamer, qemu-kvm needs bluez, and so on...
So you say, when people did use GNOME for several years and now GNOME can't be used by them anymore, they simply should use another DE. I'm not talking about PA only, GNOME3 e.g. ships with a graphics issue. So a DE shouldn't be reliable, compatible, but from one day to the other become unusable, so that a user needs to change the work flow.
Users should use up to date software and if they use a computer for professional productions, they also should be flexible, simply use another DE. That's grotesque.
This isn't the original Linux policy, this is some new policy and one after the other distro gets impacted by this new style.
Ralf
On 12/23/2011 02:10 PM, Ralf Madorf wrote:
This isn't the original Linux policy, this is some new policy and one after the other distro gets impacted by this new style.
Um what? GNOME is not Linux, nor is it Arch Linux. If you don't like what GNOME is doing, don't use it. :p
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 22:28 -0500, Brendan Long wrote:
If you don't like what GNOME is doing, don't use it. :p
Please read my mails more carefully. I do like what many GNOME apps are doing. I already switched to Xfce, but from time to time I'll test GNOME3 and even if there might be no need for GDM, I like to use some GNOME apps with Xfce. At the moment e.g. I'm using leafpad, but for some reasons I might switch to gedit. Of cause, I won't use nautilus for Xfce. But a login manager and two parallel installed DEs shouldn't break the other DE. I don't care who is to blame, GNOME or package builders, but it should be possible to install Xfce and GNOME without breaking Xfce for DAW usage, but PA does break DAW usage, just because something (PA) gets installed that isn't needed, it's even not needed for GNOME itself, just for some consumer audio usage it might be an advantage for a special consumer group.
- Ralf
I agree with Paul and Peter. People cant be treating others like crap just because they are asking for help. If you don't have anything better to say, then just be quiet and filter, you don't have to contribute. I've only been on these mailing lists for a few days and I know most people aren't like this, but every time I see someone respond negatively, its not just a small insult, but more of a "rub it in your face" attitude.
Also to Phillip, you said something containing SNR, what does that mean? On Dec 23, 2011 1:17 PM, "Leonid Isaev" lisaev@umail.iu.edu wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 19:03:16 +0100 Ralf Madorf ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net wrote:
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 09:44 -0600, Leonid Isaev wrote:
Can you suggest something better? I don't think so.
Yes, jackd would be much better. Pulseaudio is an unlucky choice. If there's no PA installed and people don't wish to handle jackd, ALSA already is able to do all what's needed. What was bad with e.g. arts?
Comparing jack and PA is something like comparing gnome and xfce. You can read about the differences at jackd homepage.
PA, jack, aRTS, esd, gstreamer -- developers select whatever they are comfortable with; any choice will leave someone unpleased...
For some people PA is an advantage, for other people it's an disadvantage. What's bad with enabling those who prefer PA to install it and for those who can't use PA to enable not to install PA?
Why is there this go/no-go type?
Exactly, that's why the common approach to packaging is to enable as much functionality as possible. Don't like it -- use ABS. Otherwise we can argue why xfce needs gstreamer, qemu-kvm needs bluez, and so on...
- Ralf
-- Leonid Isaev GnuPG key ID: 164B5A6D Key fingerprint: C0DF 20D0 C075 C3F1 E1BE 775A A7AE F6CB 164B 5A6D
2011/12/23 Jonathan Vasquez jvasquez1011@gmail.com:
I agree with Paul and Peter. People cant be treating others like crap just because they are asking for help. If you don't have anything better to say, then just be quiet and filter, you don't have to contribute. I've only been on these mailing lists for a few days and I know most people aren't like this, but every time I see someone respond negatively, its not just a small insult, but more of a "rub it in your face" attitude.
Also to Phillip, you said something containing SNR, what does that mean?
SNR stands for Signal to Noise Ratio, a low SNR would indicate relatively little useful information (signal) compared to the amount of unrelated or undesirable comments (noise).
i.e. my reply is lowering the SNR, a bad thing ;)
Haha alright thanks :) On Dec 23, 2011 2:21 PM, "Stefan Wilkens" stefanwilkens@gmail.com wrote:
2011/12/23 Jonathan Vasquez jvasquez1011@gmail.com:
I agree with Paul and Peter. People cant be treating others like crap
just
because they are asking for help. If you don't have anything better to
say,
then just be quiet and filter, you don't have to contribute. I've only
been
on these mailing lists for a few days and I know most people aren't like this, but every time I see someone respond negatively, its not just a
small
insult, but more of a "rub it in your face" attitude.
Also to Phillip, you said something containing SNR, what does that mean?
SNR stands for Signal to Noise Ratio, a low SNR would indicate relatively little useful information (signal) compared to the amount of unrelated or undesirable comments (noise).
i.e. my reply is lowering the SNR, a bad thing ;)
Pulse recently replaced esound as the dependent sound server for gnome[1], esound has been marked dead.
You might have some relative success if you drop pulse and do some per-application configuration to redirect their default output to alsa or OSS. While this would work for applications such as gstreamer (gstreamer-properties), pidgin, vlc, mplayer.. you will find yourself with a broken gnome. You'll need a new mixer application, setup software mixing (or hardware if your card privides) etc.
You may find life simpler by disabling [2] pulse, rather than removing it.
[1] http://live.gnome.org/PulseAudio [2] https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=928817#p928817
2011/12/23 Ionut Biru ibiru@archlinux.org:
On 12/23/2011 11:25 AM, Ralf Madorf wrote:
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 11:17 +0200, Ionut Biru wrote:
can you clarify that you are talking about pulseaudio and not about libpulse?
# pacman -Rss pulseaudio checking dependencies... error: failed to prepare transaction (could not satisfy dependencies) :: gnome-settings-daemon: requires pulseaudio :: pulseaudio-alsa: requires pulseaudio
ok then, gnome requires pulseaudio. The only way to get rid of pulseaudio is to get rid of gnome.
-- Ionuț
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 10:38 +0100, Stefan Wilkens wrote:
Pulse recently replaced esound as the dependent sound server for gnome[1], esound has been marked dead.
You might have some relative success if you drop pulse and do some per-application configuration to redirect their default output to alsa or OSS. While this would work for applications such as gstreamer (gstreamer-properties), pidgin, vlc, mplayer.. you will find yourself with a broken gnome. You'll need a new mixer application, setup software mixing (or hardware if your card privides) etc.
You may find life simpler by disabling [2] pulse, rather than removing it.
[1] http://live.gnome.org/PulseAudio [2] https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=928817#p928817
So I should install PA, while not using it? Is this the interpretation of KISS by Arch Linux?
I already have written that I'll use a HDSP card = HDSP mixer, a desktop mixer thingy won't be able to handle such an audio card and my sound server will be Jack with ALSA backend.
- Ralf
Arch Linux stands by being as close as possible to upstream. If upstream makes a decision, Arch follows it. Arch hardly patches anything at all. So basically whatever packages you get when you try to install something, is the way that upstream wanted those packages to be installed.
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 5:03 AM, Ralf Madorf ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.netwrote:
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 10:38 +0100, Stefan Wilkens wrote:
Pulse recently replaced esound as the dependent sound server for gnome[1], esound has been marked dead.
You might have some relative success if you drop pulse and do some per-application configuration to redirect their default output to alsa or OSS. While this would work for applications such as gstreamer (gstreamer-properties), pidgin, vlc, mplayer.. you will find yourself with a broken gnome. You'll need a new mixer application, setup software mixing (or hardware if your card privides) etc.
You may find life simpler by disabling [2] pulse, rather than removing
it.
[1] http://live.gnome.org/PulseAudio [2] https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=928817#p928817
So I should install PA, while not using it? Is this the interpretation of KISS by Arch Linux?
I already have written that I'll use a HDSP card = HDSP mixer, a desktop mixer thingy won't be able to handle such an audio card and my sound server will be Jack with ALSA backend.
- Ralf
On 12/23/2011 05:03 AM, Ralf Madorf wrote:
So I should install PA, while not using it? Is this the interpretation of KISS by Arch Linux?
I already have written that I'll use a HDSP card = HDSP mixer, a desktop mixer thingy won't be able to handle such an audio card and my sound server will be Jack with ALSA backend.
Your definition of simple sounds more like Gentoo's. Is it really worth the effort to save 5 MB of disk space (while having random broken packages)?
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 22:34 -0500, Brendan Long wrote:
Is it really worth the effort to save 5 MB of disk space (while having random broken packages)?
When the packages pulseaudio and pulseaudio-alsa (including /etc/asound.conf) are replaced by a dummy package no other package would be broken.
Assumed the command pulseaudio --kill should work without failure, then what would be the difference to not directly replacing the two packages by a dummy package or perhaps two dummy packages?
IIUC https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/PKGBUILD#provides ...
"provides
An array of package names that this package provides the features of (or a virtual package such as cron or sh). If you use this variable, you should add the version (pkgver and perhaps the pkgrel) that this package will provide if dependencies may be affected by it. For instance, if you are providing a modified qt package named qt-foobar version 3.3.8 which provides qt then the provides array should look like provides=('qt=3.3.8'). Putting provides=('qt') will cause to fail those dependencies that require a specific version of qt. Do not add pkgname to your provides array, this is done automatically."
... instead of
$ cat PKGBUILD pkgname=pulseaudio-dummy pkgver=1.0 pkgrel=1 pkgdesc="A dummy package that pretends to provide pulseaudio." arch=('any') url="" license=('BSD') provides=('pulseaudio') conflicts=('pulseaudio') source=()
... provides=('pulseaudio') better should be ('pulseaudio>=1.1-1') OTOH I can imagine that ">" is an argument that isn't allowed? And also it's ok to provides=('pulseaudio pulseaudio-alsa') ?!
- Ralf
On Sat, 2011-12-24 at 08:08 +0100, Ralf Madorf wrote:
[snip] IIUC https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/PKGBUILD#provides [snip]
provides=('pulseaudio pulseaudio-alsa') ?!
provides=('pulseaudio' 'pulseaudio-alsa')
?!
- Ralf
On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 1:08 AM, Ralf Madorf ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net wrote:
[...] what would be the difference [...] For Debian I [...]
Ralf ...
your thread has managed to generate 65+ responses in 24 hours -- yet you have not actually encountered a problem, nor produced anything concrete to work with -- and thus far you've only provided conjectures regarding PulseAudio, and vagaries surrounding your vision of an ideal/niche setup.
last night i would have been the first to reply to your message, as i was attempting to curtail the resultant flood i knew would undoubtedly ensue, (alas, writing a page of text on a mobile takes forever) ... i provided all the details needed to understand the decisions made, as many others subsequently did ... one way or another.
to reiterate, packages that *can* use PA will pull in libpulse to satisfy those of us that *want* to use what has become a fine sound server. if a package *needs* PA to function _as intended upstream_, it will pull pulseaudio. GDM is the latter. if you do not like this, simply use a different login manager -- problem solved -- or take to fight to the next level, which is far from here.
you're comments RE:PA appear to be from 3rd party information, possibly years outdated, as you have not provided any indication suggesting you've encountered an issue, first-hand, ascribable to PulseAudio . methinks if you scan your system, you will likely find oodles of "stuff" you "don't need" ... package managers are limited in flexibility, and thus can only provide coarse/best-guess dependency resolutions. the decisions made by Arch developers provide you maximum flexibility, within said limits, and are likely beyond what several other distros would afford you.
i thoroughly recommend immediately and permanently terminating this line of conversation, and returning when you have encountered a _concrete_ problem by which PulseAudio is [seemingly] causing an immediate, and diagnosable, issue, and you are unable to solve it via the usuals (eg. wiki, bbs, GOOG) ... else, i suspect your ability to procure future solutions from this list, and your peers, will be hampered by the impression being formed right now.
take it or leave it :-)
On Sat, 2011-12-24 at 01:49 -0600, C Anthony Risinger wrote:
Ralf ...
your thread has managed to generate 65+ responses in 24 hours [snip]
Most of them were unfriendly insults by others! So please be fair and don't blame me. You might count the useful friendly mails instead. Btw. it's not only me who was abused without a reason.
When somebody asked regarding to the upgrade mtab issue it also caused a flood of unneeded mails. Instead of posting a link to the latest news http://www.archlinux.org/ on this list it seems to be netiquette to insult users. It was the same with somebody asking regarding to locale.sh, about people who do top posting etc. ... FWIW I got help regarding to this thread from top posters :).
conjectures regarding PulseAudio
I experienced enough issues myself and several Linux audio users lists are crowded with issues regarding to PA.
i thoroughly recommend immediately and permanently terminating this line of conversation, and returning when you have encountered a _concrete_ problem by which PulseAudio is [seemingly] causing an immediate, and diagnosable, issue, and you are unable to solve it via the usuals (eg. wiki, bbs, GOOG) ... else, i suspect your ability to procure future solutions from this list, and your peers, will be hampered by the impression being formed right now.
take it or leave it :-)
I'll replace PA by a dummy package, hence it won't cause trouble on my machine. Thread closed!
- Ralf
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 11:27 +0200, Ionut Biru wrote:
On 12/23/2011 11:25 AM, Ralf Madorf wrote:
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 11:17 +0200, Ionut Biru wrote:
can you clarify that you are talking about pulseaudio and not about libpulse?
# pacman -Rss pulseaudio checking dependencies... error: failed to prepare transaction (could not satisfy dependencies) :: gnome-settings-daemon: requires pulseaudio :: pulseaudio-alsa: requires pulseaudio
ok then, gnome requires pulseaudio. The only way to get rid of pulseaudio is to get rid of gnome.
1.
At the moment only GDM is installed, not GNOME.
2.
I had GNOME3 installed for Debian and 2 dummy packages solved all issues, since GNOME3 doesn't need PA, just some "my computer should be a toy, instead of a tool" tasks need PA.
Okay, if the policy of Arch Linux is to force people to install unneeded stuff, than it simply isn't the distro I should use.
Thanks,
Ralf
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Ralf Madorf ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net wrote:
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 11:27 +0200, Ionut Biru wrote:
On 12/23/2011 11:25 AM, Ralf Madorf wrote:
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 11:17 +0200, Ionut Biru wrote:
can you clarify that you are talking about pulseaudio and not about libpulse?
# pacman -Rss pulseaudio checking dependencies... error: failed to prepare transaction (could not satisfy dependencies) :: gnome-settings-daemon: requires pulseaudio :: pulseaudio-alsa: requires pulseaudio
ok then, gnome requires pulseaudio. The only way to get rid of pulseaudio is to get rid of gnome.
At the moment only GDM is installed, not GNOME.
GDM is a part of GNOME, it pulls one bazillion GNOME dependencies, and one of them is, in fact, PulseAudio.
I had GNOME3 installed for Debian and 2 dummy packages solved all issues, since GNOME3 doesn't need PA, just some "my computer should be a toy, instead of a tool" tasks need PA.
Okay, if the policy of Arch Linux is to force people to install unneeded stuff, than it simply isn't the distro I should use.
Don't blame Arch. It is GNOME's fault, because they are too lazy to use something more universal rather than sticking with Pulse.
On the other thought, you are an idiot anyways, and it would be better to get you out of there. Arch IS NOT a distro for idiots that can't read the pacman output.
Thanks,
Ralf
2011/12/23 Ralf Madorf ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net:
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 11:27 +0200, Ionut Biru wrote:
On 12/23/2011 11:25 AM, Ralf Madorf wrote:
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 11:17 +0200, Ionut Biru wrote:
can you clarify that you are talking about pulseaudio and not about libpulse?
# pacman -Rss pulseaudio checking dependencies... error: failed to prepare transaction (could not satisfy dependencies) :: gnome-settings-daemon: requires pulseaudio :: pulseaudio-alsa: requires pulseaudio
ok then, gnome requires pulseaudio. The only way to get rid of pulseaudio is to get rid of gnome.
At the moment only GDM is installed, not GNOME.
I had GNOME3 installed for Debian and 2 dummy packages solved all issues, since GNOME3 doesn't need PA, just some "my computer should be a toy, instead of a tool" tasks need PA.
Okay, if the policy of Arch Linux is to force people to install unneeded stuff, than it simply isn't the distro I should use.
Thanks,
Ralf
No. The policy of Archlinux is to provide software which are as closed as possible from upstream. Fill free to use a distribution which tweaks to death software.
Have a good day.
On 12/23/2011 11:51 AM, Ralf Madorf wrote:
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 11:27 +0200, Ionut Biru wrote:
On 12/23/2011 11:25 AM, Ralf Madorf wrote:
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 11:17 +0200, Ionut Biru wrote:
can you clarify that you are talking about pulseaudio and not about libpulse?
# pacman -Rss pulseaudio checking dependencies... error: failed to prepare transaction (could not satisfy dependencies) :: gnome-settings-daemon: requires pulseaudio :: pulseaudio-alsa: requires pulseaudio
ok then, gnome requires pulseaudio. The only way to get rid of pulseaudio is to get rid of gnome.
At the moment only GDM is installed, not GNOME.
I had GNOME3 installed for Debian and 2 dummy packages solved all issues, since GNOME3 doesn't need PA, just some "my computer should be a toy, instead of a tool" tasks need PA.
Okay, if the policy of Arch Linux is to force people to install unneeded stuff, than it simply isn't the distro I should use.
hey troll, before trowing such arguments i suggest to look at our gdm version and debian version.
gdm 3.2 requires gnome-settings-daemon and all the crap.
debian has gdm 3.0 which doesn't require.
not to mention that only couples of days ago debian finished gnome 3.2.
Thanks,
Ralf
On Friday 23 Dec 2011 10:51:17 Ralf Madorf wrote:
I had GNOME3 installed for Debian and 2 dummy packages solved all issues, since GNOME3 doesn't need PA, just some "my computer should be a toy, instead of a tool" tasks need PA.
Okay, if the policy of Arch Linux is to force people to install unneeded stuff, than it simply isn't the distro I should use.
I'm sorry to hear you're unhappy with your ArchLinux setup. Sadly, the PulseAudio requirement appears to be imposed by GNOME upstream, and there's nothing that ArchLinux can do other than patch GNOME, which would not be in keeping with the "Arch Way" (http://bit.ly/eOyYlB).
However, if I understand correctly, you're interested in using ArchLinux for a Digital Audio Workstation? If you only need to use a couple of tools, you may find that you don't need a desktop environment, and could get away with a light window manager (e.g. OpenBox?) and login manager (SLiM?).
Alternatively, you could consider using KDE, which does not have a hard dependency on PulseAudio. It's had a bad reputation for being resource-heavy, but that's not really the case these days, so long as you don't use any of the heavier features (e.g. Kontact); especially if you disable the "Semantic Desktop" in System Settings.
I hope this helps, Paul
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 10:17 +0000, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
However, if I understand correctly, you're interested in using ArchLinux for a Digital Audio Workstation?
Yes
If you only need to use a couple of tools, you may find that you don't need a desktop environment, and could get away with a light window manager (e.g. OpenBox?) and login manager (SLiM?).
At least I need Xfce.
I was a KDE3 user (for some tasks I used Ion2). When KDE4 replaced KDE3 I switched to GNOME2 and when GNOME3 replaced GNOME2 I switched to Xfce.
I tested a lot of DEs/WMs.
For my DAW I'll use Xfce in the future, but I would like to test GNOME3 from time to time for the same DAW.
Thanks,
Ralf
Hi,
At least I need Xfce.
I was a KDE3 user (for some tasks I used Ion2). When KDE4 replaced KDE3 I switched to GNOME2 and when GNOME3 replaced GNOME2 I switched to Xfce.
I tested a lot of DEs/WMs.
Really? Did you do that? I know there are themes for slim that are easily available which you can use for the requirement that browseable user list?
For my DAW I'll use Xfce in the future, but I would like to test GNOME3 from time to time for the same DAW.
Thanks,
Ralf
Going by your migration history, it seems as if you want to achieve a minimum overhead distribution. No problem with that, but you must then realize that GNOME3 is never going to be minimalistic again in its present roadmap.
But you want to keep testing? No problems, but then if you want to test GNOME3, you must have pulseaudio right? So, you won't have pulseaudio on GNOME3 and have problems and then cry about how there is no freedom in the free software anymore and make a similarly flaming post on GNOME.
The main problem comes from two points. 1. You don't have any requirements of the DM as such. You just "want to use gdm without pulseaudio" and want to claim it should be possible. The closest you came to helping us helping you out was when you said the stuff about "browseable users" which I guess exists everywhere as has been pointed by Kwpolska. But you are not willing to accept the suggestions. You are whining about the point that you should have your way. If this simple thing irritates you so much, just go and write your own DM. GNOME has a GDM for "their" target audience which includes people with disabilities. In future, they might separate the distinction, but it is not there. In case you do want to, write a patch and send it to them. You are welcome with the heartiest spirits of free software community.
So first decide your requirements and then choose a DM not the other way round.
2. Your DAW does not want pulseaudio, we get it. So, design your solution. Choose a desktop environment which does not require pulseaudio. Choose a display manager accordingly. Your display manager requires something you think is necessary? Write to the maintainers there. Tell them the problem. I'm sure they are going to listen why you want a certain thing. But no, you want to blame someone "here". Everyone has their frustrations with different things in free software. Doesn't mean we just rant about it.
So, please, please choose accordingly.
You can simply turn pulseaudio off!!! I am sometimes frustrated that pulseaudio does not start!! (Not always, sometimes, when I am messing up my computer.) Write a script which turns it off at startup. That way, whatever you are doing which does not require pulseaudio, does not use it. I believe that unless your other applications (the ones that matter) do not directly require pulseaudio, you should be fine.
EDIT
I believe that unless your other applications (the ones that matter) do not directly require pulseaudio, you should be fine.
I believe that unless your other applications (the ones that matter) do directly require pulseaudio, you should be fine.
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 16:57 +0530, Jayesh Badwaik wrote:
You can simply turn pulseaudio off!!!
I wonder if this works
#!/bin/bash #Kill PulseAudio and PulseAudio Device Chooser
pulseaudio --kill killall padevchooser
Stuff like that is discussed since years and often killing PA shipped with issues for some users.
As Phillip already mentioned, the lib PA doesn't harm.
A serious question. Why is PA made a dependency by the package builders? For Arch a lot of things has to be installed by us manually. Why not handle it for PA the same way? GNOME3 isn't broken without PA. I already tested this.
- Ralf
PS: I can't see any rant in any of my mails regarding to this thread.
PS:
killall padevchooser
Perhaps this was missing when people killed PA and they still had issues.
man pasuspender
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 14:03 +0100, Alessandro Doro wrote:
man pasuspender
Ok, so it's usually not running ...
[spinymouse@archlinux ~]$ pidof pulseaudio 1051 [spinymouse@archlinux ~]$ pidof pasuspender [spinymouse@archlinux ~]$
... OT: OTOH I don't really understand how it works or why it seemingly won't solve some PA issues when it's running.
On Friday 23 Dec 2011 14:34:21 Ralf Madorf wrote:
... OT: OTOH I don't really understand how it works or why it seemingly won't solve some PA issues when it's running.
I think you need to use it to invoke other programs:
# pasuspender startx
or maybe inside .xinirc:
exec pasuspender startxfce4
Paul
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 14:05 +0000, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
On Friday 23 Dec 2011 14:34:21 Ralf Madorf wrote:
... OT: OTOH I don't really understand how it works or why it seemingly won't solve some PA issues when it's running.
I think you need to use it to invoke other programs:
# startx
or maybe inside .xinirc:
exec pasuspender startxfce4
Paul
Yes, but what would happen if you start another soundserver? Or if somebody not using jackd, but audacity + skype on an elCheapo integrated sound device simply would run pasuspender audacity
I already ask somebody to test it. https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-studio-devel/2011-December/003773.h...
- Ralf
On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 14:34:21 +0100 Ralf Madorf wrote:
Ok, so it's usually not running ...
I've used chmod 000 in the past when I couldn't find where something was initialising but updates will reset the permissions and using immutability might make pacman error and die.
Is there a way to tell pacman to hold a package like pulseaudio back, I guessed and failed to hold the linux kernel back (I use LTS-grsec) in pacman.conf and haven't got around to looking into it yet.
This is a Unix issue and not even a Linux issue though Linux tends to be worse than other Unices. OpenBSD tries to minimise these dependencies as more code equals more bugs but they do get constant headaches from upstream. It's better than having ancient libraries like on windows around though. There is one distro aiming to I think statically build everything but I don't think it will do a great deal at the moment.
One of the main reasons I have chosen to use arch is because you don't have to go around switching crap off after each upgrade or after install only to find they moved the init for the umpteenth time without documenting it and making it more difficult as if they are pissed off that you want to turn off the avahi-daemon crap etc..
I run xfce with gnome-alsamixer and alsa as neither xfces mixer nor pulse audio are compatible with the grsecurity kernel patch with all security protections enabled, but I didn't try gnome3 because it works on less hardware and I have to disable 3d support on some machines, due to the gaping security hole that graphics cards require and now web browsers have access to.
The arch alsa page is quite helpful and I imagine gnome will run just fine with alsa even if the gnome developers have decided as I have seen blogged that no-one has any reason not to use pulseaudio.
Kc
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 3:34 PM, Kevin Chadwick ma1l1ists@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
[...] I have to disable 3d support on some machines,due to the gaping security hole that graphics cards require [...]
OT:
Would you care to elaborate on this? What security hole do you have in mind?
Cheers,
Tom
On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 15:54:35 +0100 Tom Gundersen wrote:
[...] I have to disable 3d support on some machines,due to the gaping security hole that graphics cards require [...]
OT:
Would you care to elaborate on this? What security hole do you have in mind?
Cheers,
Tom
http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=114233317926101
And equivelent on Linux
http://forums.grsecurity.net/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=47
You can use framebuffer mode or the nouveau driver instead of the nvidia binary and still run X with RAWIO access disabled but with limited acceleration.
On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 19:35:23 +0000 Kevin Chadwick ma1l1ists@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
You can use framebuffer mode or the nouveau driver instead of the nvidia binary and still run X with RAWIO access disabled but with limited acceleration.
Interesting, how does it work with nouveau? Disabling cap_sys_rawio renders X unusable with intel drivers (it fails to start with an I/O error).
On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 14:38:14 -0600 Leonid Isaev wrote:
Disabling cap_sys_rawio renders X unusable with intel drivers (it fails to start with an I/O error).
Depends on the driver, newer ati may have a better KMS method than framebuffer but adding vga=ask to the kernel bootline and using xf86-video-fbdev driver works for older cards.
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 8:35 PM, Kevin Chadwick ma1l1ists@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 15:54:35 +0100 Tom Gundersen wrote:
[...] I have to disable 3d support on some machines, due to the gaping security hole that graphics cards require [...]
OT:
Would you care to elaborate on this? What security hole do you have in mind?
Cheers,
Tom
http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=114233317926101
And equivelent on Linux
http://forums.grsecurity.net/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=47
You can use framebuffer mode or the nouveau driver instead of the nvidia binary and still run X with RAWIO access disabled but with limited acceleration.
Right, now I got it. You mean that there is a security hole on the machines where you don't use the open source (i.e. KMS) drivers. This is correct.
Thanks for the clarification.
-t
On Sat, 24 Dec 2011 00:20:17 +0100 Tom Gundersen wrote:
http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=114233317926101
And equivelent on Linux
http://forums.grsecurity.net/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=47
You can use framebuffer mode or the nouveau driver instead of the nvidia binary and still run X with RAWIO access disabled but with limited acceleration.
Right, now I got it. You mean that there is a security hole on the machines where you don't use the open source (i.e. KMS) drivers. This is correct.
Thanks for the clarification.
Yeah and it may be more difficult to exploit on a system running KMS drivers but unless RAWIO is closed at kernel level (compilation (preferred), selinux, setcap, lcap) then the hole is still there as the default stance is obviously to allow all graphics cards to work.
On Mon, 2011-12-26 at 15:39 +0000, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
On Sat, 24 Dec 2011 00:20:17 +0100 Tom Gundersen wrote:
http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=114233317926101
And equivelent on Linux
http://forums.grsecurity.net/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=47
You can use framebuffer mode or the nouveau driver instead of the nvidia binary and still run X with RAWIO access disabled but with limited acceleration.
Right, now I got it. You mean that there is a security hole on the machines where you don't use the open source (i.e. KMS) drivers. This is correct.
Thanks for the clarification.
Yeah and it may be more difficult to exploit on a system running KMS drivers but unless RAWIO is closed at kernel level (compilation (preferred), selinux, setcap, lcap) then the hole is still there as the default stance is obviously to allow all graphics cards to work.
If it were up to me I'd appreciate your input, but note, it's OT, the thread is closed and in the end the mailing list police will measure the S/N with the S/N list meter or simply count the mails and blame me for too much traffic. Btw. in a German Arch forum I read "Jawoll Herr Wachtmeister", this can't be translated, it's ironical regarding to narrow-mindedness. Unfortunately there seems to be many unwritten laws for Arch mailing lists and forums, counter the often quoted netiquette.
So, please, open a new thread or write off-list. I e.g. answered off-list regarding to accusations that my knowledge about issues with PA is from 3d Party, since I could give endless much examples, I just gave one major example, AGAIN off-list, regarding to pro-audio cards that don't work without a fix.
AGAIN if it were up to me I'd allow you to continue, but it's not my decision. It's unwanted regarding to S/N, resp. too much traffic, so I decided to close this thread.
Merry Christmas,
Ralf
On Mon, 2011-12-26 at 18:29 +0100, Ralf Madorf wrote:
On Mon, 2011-12-26 at 15:39 +0000, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
On Sat, 24 Dec 2011 00:20:17 +0100 Tom Gundersen wrote:
http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=114233317926101
And equivelent on Linux
http://forums.grsecurity.net/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=47
You can use framebuffer mode or the nouveau driver instead of the nvidia binary and still run X with RAWIO access disabled but with limited acceleration.
Right, now I got it. You mean that there is a security hole on the machines where you don't use the open source (i.e. KMS) drivers. This is correct.
Thanks for the clarification.
Yeah and it may be more difficult to exploit on a system running KMS drivers but unless RAWIO is closed at kernel level (compilation (preferred), selinux, setcap, lcap) then the hole is still there as the default stance is obviously to allow all graphics cards to work.
If it were up to me I'd appreciate your input, but note, it's OT, the thread is closed and in the end the mailing list police will measure the S/N with the S/N list meter or simply count the mails and blame me for too much traffic. Btw. in a German Arch forum I read "Jawoll Herr Wachtmeister", this can't be translated, it's ironical regarding to narrow-mindedness. Unfortunately there seems to be many unwritten laws for Arch mailing lists and forums, counter the often quoted netiquette.
So, please, open a new thread or write off-list. I e.g. answered off-list regarding to accusations that my knowledge about issues with PA
^^^^^^^^^^^ baseless accusations
is from 3d Party, since I could give endless much examples, I just gave
^^ should be (sorry for my broken English)
one major example, AGAIN off-list, regarding to pro-audio cards that don't work without a fix.
... on my computer
AGAIN if it were up to me I'd allow you to continue, but it's not my decision. It's unwanted regarding to S/N, resp. too much traffic, so I decided to close this thread.
Merry Christmas,
Ralf
Anyway, I'll be quiet regarding to this CLOSED thread now and I ask everybody else to hush too.
Nevertheless, searching Arch forums and Arch mailing list archives lead to useful information, even if every second mail beef about "wrong questions", wrong "posting style" :(.
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 14:34 +0000, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
This is a Unix issue and not even a Linux issue though Linux tends to be worse than other Unices. OpenBSD tries to minimise these dependencies as more code equals more bugs but they do get constant headaches from upstream. It's better than having ancient libraries like on windows around though. There is one distro aiming to I think statically build everything but I don't think it will do a great deal at the moment.
One of the main reasons I have chosen to use arch is because you don't have to go around switching crap off after each upgrade or after install only to find they moved the init for the umpteenth time without documenting it and making it more difficult as if they are pissed off that you want to turn off the avahi-daemon crap etc..
I run xfce with gnome-alsamixer and alsa as neither xfces mixer nor pulse audio are compatible with the grsecurity kernel patch with all security protections enabled, but I didn't try gnome3 because it works on less hardware and I have to disable 3d support on some machines, due to the gaping security hole that graphics cards require and now web browsers have access to.
The arch alsa page is quite helpful and I imagine gnome will run just fine with alsa even if the gnome developers have decided as I have seen blogged that no-one has any reason not to use pulseaudio.
Kc
IIRC on Debian I had GNOME 3.0.x installed and this worked when I simply replaced the pulseaudio package and a second package with an empty dummy. For the "regular" and for the "fallback" mode. Of cause I used ALSA or jackd with ALSA backend and I preferred to switch to Xfce. IIRC for Debian pulseaudio was installed when there was the upgrade from GNOME2 to GNOME3.
- Ralf
On Dec 23, 2011 2:41 AM, "Ralf Madorf" ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net wrote:
Is there a clean solution to get completely rid of PA?
Do not install an application requiring it?
You'll need to provide context about what you're trying to accomplish (clear and simple goals) and what you've already done (eg. I ran command xyz, I installed gnome, etc ...)
So far we've only learned PA probably sux, you don't want it on you system, and some random bits about Debian ;-) ... best to assume nothing of the solution since that's what you are here requesting. Simply state your end-goals, the issue(s), and the path taken thus far.
IIRC PA is split into a library package, among others. Many pkgs will dep libpulse, but it cannot be loaded (or possibly will not) without the accompanying support packages.
Audio is not my thing, but I absorb passively often as possible. PA will play nicely with other impls by suspending itself and releasing the hardware when requested, allowing (JACK and ?) others to assume control. My guess is there is not an issue here ... I suggest moving forward until a concrete problem is encountered, or running headless.
While I'm not into pro audio, I do use PA successfully on several machines daily with great satisfaction and zero issue; be sure you understand the difference between ALSA, alsa-lib, and PA.
--
C Anthony [mobile]
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 03:39 -0600, C Anthony Risinger wrote:
Do not install an application requiring it?
Why does GDM require it? Why does GNOME3 require it?
You'll need to provide context about what you're trying to accomplish (clear and simple goals) and what you've already done (eg. I ran command xyz, I installed gnome, etc ...)
The goal is a DAW with a professional audio card from RME. Since PA isn't needed, but it's always good to cause trouble, I won't have it installed.
I wish to have the libre to use GNOME3, even if I now use Xfce only.
So far we've only learned PA probably sux, you don't want it on you system, and some random bits about Debian ;-) ... best to assume nothing of the solution since that's what you are here requesting. Simply state your end-goals, the issue(s), and the path taken thus far.
I installed ArchLinux, upgraded it by the basic repositories and only installed Xfce, GDM, some mailers, NVIDIA driver, nothing else until now.
I'm going to set up a DAW and graphic machine with a kernel-rt, Ardour3 with video timeline, GIMP etc..
I like to install GNOME3 too.
IIRC PA is split into a library package, among others. Many pkgs will dep libpulse, but it cannot be loaded (or possibly will not) without the accompanying support packages.
Audio is not my thing, but I absorb passively often as possible. PA will play nicely with other impls by suspending itself and releasing the hardware when requested, allowing (JACK and ?) others to assume control. My guess is there is not an issue here ... I suggest moving forward until a concrete problem is encountered, or running headless.
While I'm not into pro audio, I do use PA successfully on several machines daily with great satisfaction and zero issue; be sure you understand the difference between ALSA, alsa-lib, and PA.
It already is an issue. I don't need PA for my work. Even if it should cause no issue, I don't need it.
- Ralf
You should speak to GNOME about why they require PA. If Debian doesn't require it, then they most likely patched it to not require it. Arch doesn't really patch .. avoids it if possible.
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 5:11 AM, Ralf Madorf ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.netwrote:
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 03:39 -0600, C Anthony Risinger wrote:
Do not install an application requiring it?
Why does GDM require it? Why does GNOME3 require it?
You'll need to provide context about what you're trying to accomplish (clear and simple goals) and what you've already done (eg. I ran command xyz, I installed gnome, etc ...)
The goal is a DAW with a professional audio card from RME. Since PA isn't needed, but it's always good to cause trouble, I won't have it installed.
I wish to have the libre to use GNOME3, even if I now use Xfce only.
So far we've only learned PA probably sux, you don't want it on you
system,
and some random bits about Debian ;-) ... best to assume nothing of the solution since that's what you are here requesting. Simply state your end-goals, the issue(s), and the path taken thus far.
I installed ArchLinux, upgraded it by the basic repositories and only installed Xfce, GDM, some mailers, NVIDIA driver, nothing else until now.
I'm going to set up a DAW and graphic machine with a kernel-rt, Ardour3 with video timeline, GIMP etc..
I like to install GNOME3 too.
IIRC PA is split into a library package, among others. Many pkgs will dep libpulse, but it cannot be loaded (or possibly will not) without the accompanying support packages.
Audio is not my thing, but I absorb passively often as possible. PA will play nicely with other impls by suspending itself and releasing the hardware when requested, allowing (JACK and ?) others to assume control. My guess is there is not an issue here ... I suggest moving forward
until a
concrete problem is encountered, or running headless.
While I'm not into pro audio, I do use PA successfully on several
machines
daily with great satisfaction and zero issue; be sure you understand the difference between ALSA, alsa-lib, and PA.
It already is an issue. I don't need PA for my work. Even if it should cause no issue, I don't need it.
- Ralf
Wow :D
I first just asked for a solution similar to Debian dummy packages and get tons [1] of insults.
Then I explained why I (and I know a lot of other people) will install e.g. GNOME. I'll do it again. We might wish to use this DE or simply GDM as login manager. I don't blame Arch Linux packages, I just blame answers like "don't use gnome".
No netiquette?
I was silent since days, stopped putting in my 2 cents all the time and now I asked for help and get those answers?! That's strange and creepy.
Anyway, if somebody should know a solution how to use GNOME without PA, any hints are welcome.
Cheers!
Ralf
[1] OT, but too funny, since I got all mails two times, even more than 1k of old mails Evolution already had downloaded from the server.
Quoting Ralf Madorf (2011-12-23 11:35:49)
Wow :D
I first just asked for a solution similar to Debian dummy packages and get tons [1] of insults.
No, you didn't. You only mentioned that you used dummy packages on debian. You asked and talked about a lot of other things. Please consider writing fewer but more thought-through mails.
Then I explained why I (and I know a lot of other people) will install e.g. GNOME. I'll do it again. We might wish to use this DE or simply GDM as login manager. I don't blame Arch Linux packages, I just blame answers like "don't use gnome".
No netiquette?
I was silent since days, stopped putting in my 2 cents all the time and now I asked for help and get those answers?! That's strange and creepy.
This list isn't usually offensive, this thread has a low SNR, which might be what annoys people.
Anyway, if somebody should know a solution how to use GNOME without PA, any hints are welcome.
Cheers!
Ralf
Maybe there are dummy packages in AUR, maybe you need to create them. I personally try to avoid DEs and their dependencies. libpulse is installed on my system as well, there was no way around it, but libpulse on its own doesn't run, doesn't hurt, so I can live with that.
Regards, Philipp
On 12/23/2011 12:11 PM, Ralf Madorf wrote:
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 03:39 -0600, C Anthony Risinger wrote:
Do not install an application requiring it?
Why does GDM require it? Why does GNOME3 require it?
why are you talking about it here? We are not GNOME.
but to answer your question, gdm always was a instance of a user session(gdm) modified.
To work everything in the login manager, the way it looks, the way it works, as in power manager, suspend, video, everything! is done by gnome-settings-daemon.
You'll need to provide context about what you're trying to accomplish (clear and simple goals) and what you've already done (eg. I ran command xyz, I installed gnome, etc ...)
The goal is a DAW with a professional audio card from RME. Since PA isn't needed, but it's always good to cause trouble, I won't have it installed.
I wish to have the libre to use GNOME3, even if I now use Xfce only.
So far we've only learned PA probably sux, you don't want it on you system, and some random bits about Debian ;-) ... best to assume nothing of the solution since that's what you are here requesting. Simply state your end-goals, the issue(s), and the path taken thus far.
I installed ArchLinux, upgraded it by the basic repositories and only installed Xfce, GDM, some mailers, NVIDIA driver, nothing else until now.
if you don't like gdm, remove it and replace it with lxdm,lightdm or other crap out there.
I'm going to set up a DAW and graphic machine with a kernel-rt, Ardour3 with video timeline, GIMP etc..
I like to install GNOME3 too.
IIRC PA is split into a library package, among others. Many pkgs will dep libpulse, but it cannot be loaded (or possibly will not) without the accompanying support packages.
Audio is not my thing, but I absorb passively often as possible. PA will play nicely with other impls by suspending itself and releasing the hardware when requested, allowing (JACK and ?) others to assume control. My guess is there is not an issue here ... I suggest moving forward until a concrete problem is encountered, or running headless.
While I'm not into pro audio, I do use PA successfully on several machines daily with great satisfaction and zero issue; be sure you understand the difference between ALSA, alsa-lib, and PA.
It already is an issue. I don't need PA for my work. Even if it should cause no issue, I don't need it.
- Ralf
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 12:16 +0200, Ionut Biru wrote:
if you don't like gdm, remove it and replace it with lxdm,lightdm or other crap out there.
I like GDM. I don't like login managers where I can't browse the users.
- Ralf
On 23/12/11 20:49, Ralf Madorf wrote:
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 12:16 +0200, Ionut Biru wrote:
if you don't like gdm, remove it and replace it with lxdm,lightdm or other crap out there.
I like GDM. I don't like login managers where I can't browse the users.
Good to see you did you research on other login managers...
On Friday 23 Dec 2011 21:02:43 Allan McRae wrote:
I like GDM. I don't like login managers where I can't browse the users.
Good to see you did you research on other login managers...
I don't think this kind of sarcasm is going to help Ralph, and is likely to make him more frustrated, which will just make you more frustrated.
Ralph, I really suggest you check out SLiM or LightDM. Ubuntu is replacing GDM with LightDM. I'm pretty sure that means it's at least as good...
Paul
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 11:02 +0000, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
On Friday 23 Dec 2011 21:02:43 Allan McRae wrote:
I like GDM. I don't like login managers where I can't browse the users.
Good to see you did you research on other login managers...
I don't think this kind of sarcasm is going to help Ralph, and is likely to make him more frustrated, which will just make you more frustrated.
Ralph, I really suggest you check out SLiM or LightDM. Ubuntu is replacing GDM with LightDM. I'm pretty sure that means it's at least as good...
Paul
Thanks again :)
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Ralf Madorf ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net wrote:
Wow :D
I first just asked for a solution similar to Debian dummy packages and get tons [1] of insults.
Then I explained why I (and I know a lot of other people) will install e.g. GNOME. I'll do it again. We might wish to use this DE or simply GDM as login manager. I don't blame Arch Linux packages, I just blame answers like "don't use gnome".
No netiquette?
I was silent since days, stopped putting in my 2 cents all the time and now I asked for help and get those answers?! That's strange and creepy.
Anyway, if somebody should know a solution how to use GNOME without PA, any hints are welcome.
Cheers!
Ralf
[1] OT, but too funny, since I got all mails two times, even more than 1k of old mails Evolution already had downloaded from the server.
Dear idiot,
I'm kinda wondering why you aren't filtered from my mailbox yet. You top-posted, "put in" useless "2 cents", and whatnot. Now you are asking a stupid question. Using GNOME or GDM without PA is I-M-P-O-S-S-I-B-L-E. Period. If you are wondering, why one needs sound in GDM, I can help you (not tested, but I'm sure it actually happens): what if you mistype your password? Or maybe you can't see the login prompt and your computer should say "Choose your username and type your password"? There are many uses for that. But even if you don't need that, GDM and all other GNOME apps are SUPPOSED to be used as a part of GNOME, not I-want-to-use-kde-and-gdm-and-nautilus-and-whatnot. Expect such issues.
My suggestion is: (a) stop whining; or (b) learn how to code and cut out all sound stuff out of gnome-settings-daemon. No matter what you choose, there is one more option, which is much better: GET OUTTA HERE and use Debian if you like it so much. Not right? Then buy a Mac. Or Windows if you want to. PERIOD.
Oh, and in case you're wondering, you will be filtered out after I see your response to this message.
Sincerely, Chris "Kwpolska" Warrick.
P.S. On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Ralf Madorf ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net wrote:
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 12:16 +0200, Ionut Biru wrote:
if you don't like gdm, remove it and replace it with lxdm,lightdm or other crap out there.
I like GDM. I don't like login managers where I can't browse the users.
- Ralf
Oh. So you want to tell me that [this][0] is a DM without a user browser, and [that][1] (sorry for an Ubuntu screenshot), and [that][2] for sure doesn't have a user list! [0]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:KDM.jpg [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lightdm-screenshot.jpg [2]: http://wiki.lxde.org/en/File:LXDM.png
I'm looking forward to your answer, especially on the first part of this message.
C.
On Friday 23 Dec 2011 12:06:37 Kwpolska wrote:
Dear idiot,
I'm kinda wondering why you aren't filtered from my mailbox yet. [..] I-M-P-O-S-S-I-B-L-E. Period.
Seriously? It's comments like this that make me wonder if subscribing to this list is really worth it. At least you did go on to provide some useful information, albeit in a "if I MUST stoop down to your level" kind of tone.
My suggestion is: (a) stop whining; or (b) learn how to code and cut out all sound stuff out of gnome-settings-daemon. No matter what you choose, there is one more option, which is much better: GET OUTTA HERE and use Debian if you like it so much. Not right? Then buy a Mac. Or Windows if you want to. PERIOD.
Wow. I'm truly mortified that the Linux world is associated with behaviour like yours. What gives you the right to talk like that to *anyone*, let alone someone who came to us for help?
Paul
On Friday 23 Dec 2011 11:18:33 Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
On Friday 23 Dec 2011 12:06:37 Kwpolska wrote:
Dear idiot,
I'm kinda wondering why you aren't filtered from my mailbox yet. [..] I-M-P-O-S-S-I-B-L-E. Period.
Seriously? It's comments like this that make me wonder if subscribing to this list is really worth it. At least you did go on to provide some useful information, albeit in a "if I MUST stoop down to your level" kind of tone.
My suggestion is: (a) stop whining; or (b) learn how to code and cut out all sound stuff out of gnome-settings-daemon. No matter what you choose, there is one more option, which is much better: GET OUTTA HERE and use Debian if you like it so much. Not right? Then buy a Mac. Or Windows if you want to. PERIOD.
Wow. I'm truly mortified that the Linux world is associated with behaviour like yours. What gives you the right to talk like that to *anyone*, let alone someone who came to us for help?
+1 from me.
Yes, you might be getting frustrated with someone's emails, so just ignore them, filter them out, try to get them banned, whatever what you want. But I don't think we shouldn't tolerate people talking like this to others in our Arch-space. I've left at least one community due to abusive attitudes on mailing lists.
Pete.
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 11:18:33AM +0000, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
Seriously? It's comments like this that make me wonder if subscribing to this list is really worth it. At least you did go on to provide some useful information, albeit in a "if I MUST stoop down to your level" kind of tone.
My suggestion is: (a) stop whining; or (b) learn how to code and cut out all sound stuff out of gnome-settings-daemon. No matter what you choose, there is one more option, which is much better: GET OUTTA HERE and use Debian if you like it so much. Not right? Then buy a Mac. Or Windows if you want to. PERIOD.
Wow. I'm truly mortified that the Linux world is associated with behaviour like yours. What gives you the right to talk like that to *anyone*, let alone someone who came to us for help?
Paul
+1
I've sure seen my share of rude and discurtius answers tonight. I understand if the discussion drags on and yes, Ralph was given some constructive answers about gnome and its dependencies. And yes, Ralph needs to except the reasoning about upstream designs outside of Arch's control. but still, the put-downs are quite unnecessary as far as I'm concerned.
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:36 PM, Steve Holmes steve.holmes88@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 11:18:33AM +0000, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
Seriously? It's comments like this that make me wonder if subscribing to this list is really worth it. At least you did go on to provide some useful information, albeit in a "if I MUST stoop down to your level" kind of tone.
My suggestion is: (a) stop whining; or (b) learn how to code and cut out all sound stuff out of gnome-settings-daemon. No matter what you choose, there is one more option, which is much better: GET OUTTA HERE and use Debian if you like it so much. Not right? Then buy a Mac. Or Windows if you want to. PERIOD.
Wow. I'm truly mortified that the Linux world is associated with behaviour like yours. What gives you the right to talk like that to *anyone*, let alone someone who came to us for help?
Paul
+1
I've sure seen my share of rude and discurtius answers tonight. I understand if the discussion drags on and yes, Ralph was given some constructive answers about gnome and its dependencies. And yes, Ralph needs to except the reasoning about upstream designs outside of Arch's control. but still, the put-downs are quite unnecessary as far as I'm concerned.
Both the initial mail and the put-downs, would you agree? The problem with these sort of 'questions' is how they keep cropping up. Not just talking about pulseaudio, but the whole 'Arch is supposed to be this because I believe it' stuff is tiresome.
On 12/28/2011 10:16 PM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:36 PM, Steve Holmessteve.holmes88@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 11:18:33AM +0000, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
Seriously? It's comments like this that make me wonder if subscribing to this list is really worth it. At least you did go on to provide some useful information, albeit in a "if I MUST stoop down to your level" kind of tone.
My suggestion is: (a) stop whining; or (b) learn how to code and cut out all sound stuff out of gnome-settings-daemon. No matter what you choose, there is one more option, which is much better: GET OUTTA HERE and use Debian if you like it so much. Not right? Then buy a Mac. Or Windows if you want to. PERIOD.
Wow. I'm truly mortified that the Linux world is associated with behaviour like yours. What gives you the right to talk like that to *anyone*, let alone someone who came to us for help?
Paul
+1
I've sure seen my share of rude and discurtius answers tonight. I understand if the discussion drags on and yes, Ralph was given some constructive answers about gnome and its dependencies. And yes, Ralph needs to except the reasoning about upstream designs outside of Arch's control. but still, the put-downs are quite unnecessary as far as I'm concerned.
Both the initial mail and the put-downs, would you agree? The problem with these sort of 'questions' is how they keep cropping up. Not just talking about pulseaudio, but the whole 'Arch is supposed to be this because I believe it' stuff is tiresome.
At least here you dont get the insane amount of spam like on debian boards and people here want to help even if in a rude tone. And most dont get offended here easily if someone miss speaks or does not fully grasp the English language. Debian boards are the reason I switched to Arch and while yes it a whole new world and way of thinking some just are slower to adopt that most of the issues can be solved on the wiki. Tiresome or not its the way of life on boards there is always good and bad. Though I still dont grasp if reading a message gets you so pissy you have to resort to high school antics you probably should not be responding to that message. If its a repeated question why not either no one respond which would force the person to research on their own or just send one message to check the wiki and or other pertinent place where the info has been said numerous times. I am on gumstix board as well and thats how they roll, stupid question or one thats commonly asked and answered tons of times just get ignored or someone takes 2 seconds to say hey read the wiki or search the archives of this board question has been answered.
Just my .02 from a recent Arch convert.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 12/29/2011 1:57 PM, Don Juan wrote:
If its a repeated question why not either no one respond which would force the person to research on their own or just send one message to check the wiki and or other pertinent place where the info has been said numerous times. I am on gumstix board as well and thats how they roll, stupid question or one thats commonly asked and answered tons of times just get ignored or someone takes 2 seconds to say hey read the wiki or search the archives of this board question has been answered.
Just my .02 from a recent Arch convert.
I was wondering why the same thing didn't happen here. The last time I asked a silly question on a mailing list, I woke up the next morning to over 200 messages to me, not the mailing list, with various links to LMGTFY.com. The lesson was learned without too much embarrassment on my part and barely a blip of mailing list traffic.
- --David Kolb
On Dec 30, 2011 3:32 AM, "David Kolb" david.kolb@krinchan.com wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 12/29/2011 1:57 PM, Don Juan wrote:
If its a repeated question why not either no one respond which would force the person to research on their own or just send one message to check the wiki and or other pertinent place where the info has been said numerous times. I am on gumstix board as well and thats how they roll, stupid question or one thats commonly asked and answered tons of times just get ignored or someone takes 2 seconds to say hey read the wiki or search the archives of this board question has been answered.
Just my .02 from a recent Arch convert.
I was wondering why the same thing didn't happen here. The last time I asked a silly question on a mailing list, I woke up the next morning to over 200 messages to me, not the mailing list, with various links to LMGTFY.com. The lesson was learned without too much embarrassment on my part and barely a blip of mailing list traffic.
It's because the word "pulseaudio" generates emotional reactions =)
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 12:06 +0100, Kwpolska wrote:
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Ralf Madorf ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net wrote:
Wow :D
I first just asked for a solution similar to Debian dummy packages and get tons [1] of insults.
Then I explained why I (and I know a lot of other people) will install e.g. GNOME. I'll do it again. We might wish to use this DE or simply GDM as login manager. I don't blame Arch Linux packages, I just blame answers like "don't use gnome".
No netiquette?
I was silent since days, stopped putting in my 2 cents all the time and now I asked for help and get those answers?! That's strange and creepy.
Anyway, if somebody should know a solution how to use GNOME without PA, any hints are welcome.
Cheers!
Ralf
[1] OT, but too funny, since I got all mails two times, even more than 1k of old mails Evolution already had downloaded from the server.
Dear idiot,
Dear name caller :D
I'm kinda wondering why you aren't filtered from my mailbox yet. You top-posted,
I'm not a top poster and I never was a top poster.
"put in" useless "2 cents", and whatnot.
I did, like you did now.
Now you are asking a stupid question. Using GNOME or GDM without PA is I-M-P-O-S-S-I-B-L-E. Period. If you are wondering, why one needs sound in GDM, I can help you (not tested, but I'm sure it actually happens): what if you mistype your password?
Then you'll get a PC speaker beep, but I even don't need a PC speaker beep. At least deaf also don't need sound.
Pro-audio don't need Pulseaudio. My RME card anyway won't work before I run HDSP mixer. Pulseaudio anyway can't handle my RME card.
Or maybe you can't see the login prompt and your computer should say "Choose your username and type your password"? There are many uses for that. But even if you don't need that, GDM and all other GNOME apps are SUPPOSED to be used as a part of GNOME, not I-want-to-use-kde-and-gdm-and-nautilus-and-whatnot. Expect such issues.
My suggestion is: (a) stop whining; or (b) learn how to code and cut out all sound stuff out of gnome-settings-daemon.
I only need to recompile it with a switch set, no need to learn how to code for Linux.
No matter what you choose, there is one more option, which is much better: GET OUTTA HERE and use Debian if you like it so much. Not right? Then buy a Mac. Or Windows if you want to. PERIOD.
Mac? Windows? He?
Oh, and in case you're wondering, you will be filtered out after I see your response to this message.
Sincerely, Chris "Kwpolska" Warrick.
P.S. On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Ralf Madorf ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net wrote:
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 12:16 +0200, Ionut Biru wrote:
if you don't like gdm, remove it and replace it with lxdm,lightdm or other crap out there.
I like GDM. I don't like login managers where I can't browse the users.
- Ralf
Oh. So you want to tell me that [this][0] is a DM without a user browser, and [that][1] (sorry for an Ubuntu screenshot), and [that][2] for sure doesn't have a user list! [0]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:KDM.jpg [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lightdm-screenshot.jpg [2]: http://wiki.lxde.org/en/File:LXDM.png
I'm looking forward to your answer, especially on the first part of this message.
C.
*?*
Mary Christmas too :D
Ralf
PS:
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 12:06 +0100, Kwpolska wrote:
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Ralf Madorf ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net wrote: (b) learn how to code and cut out all sound stuff out of gnome-settings-daemon.
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=998403#p998403
But this won't help, if you install GNOME lot of packages for sure depend to the package pulseaudio.
AND AGAIN, it's not true that GNOME3 needs PA. Why do you claim this untruth if you're an expert? Just some apps need it. Now imagine deaf or pro-audio users. Why should they install PA and why isn't it allowed to ask for solutions?
Again, Merry Christmas (now without typo)
participants (23)
-
Alessandro Doro
-
ali.mousavi＠gmail.com
-
Allan McRae
-
Brendan Long
-
C Anthony Risinger
-
David Kolb
-
Don Juan
-
fredbezies
-
Heiko Baums
-
Ionut Biru
-
Jayesh Badwaik
-
Jonathan Vasquez
-
Kevin Chadwick
-
Kwpolska
-
Leonid Isaev
-
Oon-Ee Ng
-
Paul Gideon Dann
-
Peter Lewis
-
Philipp Überbacher
-
Ralf Madorf
-
Stefan Wilkens
-
Steve Holmes
-
Tom Gundersen