[arch-general] Opinions on pulseaudio [WAS: PulseAudio in [testing]]

Ng Oon-Ee ngoonee at gmail.com
Sun Nov 28 17:27:15 CET 2010

On Sun, 2010-11-28 at 10:18 -0600, Yaro Kasear wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-11-29 at 00:15 +0800, Ray Rashif wrote:
> > On 29 November 2010 00:08, Yaro Kasear <yaro at marupa.net> wrote:
> > > Once again, I say PA is far from the kind of quality I'd expect from a
> > > package in [extra], and I'm surprised the Arch devs are even considering
> > > it, especially in light of the fact that there's far more stable and
> > > useful packages in [community] getting passed up.
> > 
> > Once again, nobody asked for opinions on PulseAudio, the software. If
> > it does affect you directly, do report that here or the bugtracker. It
> > was moved to [extra] for package-specific reasons, not just on a whim
> > as you would like to think.
> What packages actually REQUIRE Pulse Audio? I don't know of a single
> Linux app to date that actually NEEDS it over what already exists in
> ALSA itself.
Gnome. But as you've already stated yourself, their devs are idiots.
Since you obviously use KDE, as all other enlightened souls do.

I'm unsure on why you're directing such vitriolic hate on pulseaudio.
70% sound system breakage? Regression which causes more problems than it
solves? Perhaps you should specify[1] what you're talking about rather
than generalizing. That is, if you're interested in being taken

Split this off, its just noise to most, so I think many would just want
to mute this new thread.

[1] - note, a 'google about pulseaudio problems' doesn't count as
specifying. Googling 'linux problems' gives far more, but we don't take
that seriously, do we? Or 'KDE problems', or 'some-piece-of-software

More information about the arch-general mailing list