[arch-general] PulseAudio in [testing]

Mauro Santos registo.mailling at gmail.com
Sun Nov 28 19:07:04 CET 2010

On 28-11-2010 16:21, Yaro Kasear wrote:
> ... if they were to actually test this,
> would FLOOD this entire discussion with problems that would make the
> Arch devs reconsider this decision.

So you are making the assumption that using pulse still causes the same
problems it used to cause before (on other distros at that). To top that
you are assuming that it is pulse that is (or was) broken and not the
alsa drivers that do the actual talking to the hardware. Just because
something seems to work or claims to support something it doesn't mean
it works well for all the cases, this was most probably the case with
alsa drivers and it has improved a lot lately.

When I bought the notebook I'm using now I've used ossv4 for some time
because I couldn't stand the crappy sound that alsa (and only alsa, apps
would output directly to alsa) would put out at the time, I have given
alsa and pulse and alsa a try again and it's what I've been using for
maybe a year now with _zero_ problems, even with apps that don't know
what pulse is.

>From your other posts it seems you have some kind of pet hate for pulse
and present arguments that don't really apply currently, I'm sure there
are some people here that also have a pet hate for the way that the kde
folks seem to have to reinvent the wheel but don't spam the list with
it. Please present _objective_ advantages and disadvantages of using
pulse+alsa when compared with ossv4 or alsa + something else instead of
just saying that pulse sucks.

Mauro Santos

More information about the arch-general mailing list