OpenSound - was Re: lockmgr patch

Hasso Tepper hasso at
Thu Jun 14 22:35:53 PDT 2007

Matthew Dillon wrote:
> :Before we go too far with these fixes, would investing the effort in
> :OpenSound be better?
> :
> :
> :
> :Anecdotally, it has more supported devices and cleaner code.  I thought
> :the sound code in FreeBSD was based off an older version of this.
>     Well, we still need the lockmgr changes for the release, because
>     we can't have it panicing.  If someone wants to do a fresh port
>     of OpenSound that sounds great to me!  But we != me, my plate is full.

Me neither, regardless of interest in the area. I'm also a bit sceptical
regarding claims "it's superior" - I haven't seen anything but 4Front
marketing materials backing this. API might be cleaner, but for example
hda in FreeBSD supports more hardware/features than OpenSound driver and
I don't see envy24 driver at all in released sources.

I'm also a bit sceptical about future of OpenSound. I don't think that
OpenSound is relevant any more in Linux, they have alsa which _is_
superior than OSS. It's also clear that 4Front has intention to move
development into community (see "Possible projects for contributors" Will it work at all?
We (DragonFly) don't have resources (yet) to maintain sound drivers, so
we have to rely on community regarding this.

So, I wouldn't rush to make decisions regarding this.

Hasso Tepper

More information about the Kernel mailing list