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

Yaro Kasear yaro at marupa.net
Sun Nov 28 17:38:44 CET 2010

On Mon, 2010-11-29 at 00:27 +0800, Ng Oon-Ee wrote:
> 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
> seriously.
> 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
> problems'

GNOME 3 isn't even released yet. There's no CURRENT dependency in Arch,
in [extra], for Pulse Audio.

Fine, Then I'll list all of its problems right here:

- It's unstable.
- It's got far too many unresolved bugs the upstream developers defer
INCORRECTLY elsewhere simply because they can't be bothered to fix their
- It wastes a lot of RAM.
- It wastes a lot of CPU.
- It causes noticeable audio latency.
- It DOES NOT release sound to other daemons as your erroneously claim.
It will not turn itself off for JACK just as it won't turn itself off
for ESD or Phonon.
- It actually doesn't support ALSA that well, it's ALSA module is stuck
at 70% completion, with a lot of critical ALSA support stuck on that
missing 30%. Again, further upstream blame gets laid on ALSA or drivers
where it doesn't belong.
- It's not really necessary for any actual Linux audio needs, where
things like ESD and Phonon had already fixed the problems Pulse Audio
has no use for.
- Even the Pulse Audio devs at one point admitted it breaks Linux audio.
- A great deal of Linux applications have problems working with it, far
more than any other daemon to date. Upstream, rather than making Pulse
Audio abstract itself like ESD or Phonon does, seems to want app
developers to write their code SPECIFICALLY for Pulse Audio, which is
NOT how its done.
- An incredible array of utterly useless features (Like networking sound
in a day and age where all PCs have sound systems they can use
themselves. Never count on networking where an actual local system will
do.) that Pulse Audio fans never use bt love to brag about so they can
distract from Pulse Audio's obvious problems, just like you are doing
right now.
- Much, much more, but you get my point.

Maybe wait until GNOME 3 actually gets released before put something
unstable and useless in [extra] needlessly.

More information about the arch-general mailing list