> Sory Alan but I don't want philosophical/historical discuss.
> Try to answer on question "ALSA or OSS ?" using *only* technical arguments.
We dropped OSS for ALSA for technical reasons. Those being that ALSA
- has a better audio API
- is more flexible
- provides OSS as emulation
- supports more hardware
I used to maintain the kernel OSS code (the fork when Hannu and friends
took their project non-free). I did the work to make the sound layer
modular when the vendors realises that the open one needed to be modular
and that since that was the main play of the non-free one that Hannu
wasn't going to be doing it. From a technical perspective ALSA is the
better design especially for flexible devices.
At the desktop level these days it doesn't really matter much, the
desktops use their own sound servers which sit on top of OSS, ALSA and
other sound systems.
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
