OpenSound - was Re: lockmgr patch
hasso at estpak.ee
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"
http://developer.opensound.com/opensource_oss/). 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.
More information about the Kernel