[arch-general] Is there a clean solution to get completely rid of Pulseaudio?

[Ralf Madorf]

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 at 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