Support not in Linux, but in ALSA
I have never before *had* to use an external driver to a sound card, but this weekend it appeared to me that I had to. I bought a [cheap] PCI sound card that I needed to be non-SB because it would interfere with the mobo-SBVibra that I have. It is a ForteMedia FM801 soundcard with no information on the chips, and failing attempts to use just about every driver in Linux, I had to look elsewhere and found that ALSA supports it, just like that. It even has OSS emulation so I could continue where I left with the SB driver.
As ALSA is also GPL, does anyone here know why it hasn't been included into the Linux sound subsystem? It looks to me like there is duplicate work going on and not necessarily for the benefit of the general Linux user.
OSS is a commercial company that releases their for profit drivers when they are old enough for them not to make any profit anymore (it seems), ergo presently the Linux sound system is getting the crums from OSS, when instead we could have a very nice looking sound system like ALSA put into the kernel. I know there is more than OSS sound drivers in Linux, but those are pretty scarce and the cards pretty expensive :-)
Is it because of the history of OSS being the first to ever have Linux sound drivers, or is it the ALSA team that doesn't want to have their code included into Linux proper?
This is my first encounter ever with ALSA, and I am just wondering if there are technical (ALSA doesn't really fit well into Linux proper), managerial (somebody has to do the work and nobody can) or political (the ALSA team doesn't like the Linux sound guys or vice versa) reasons for it?
At least there has to have been some talk about it, but I have never heard it and I have not before seen ALSA mentioned a lot here?
Peter
Quoted 19 lines · Peter Rasmussen
I have never before *had* to use an external driver to a sound card, but this weekend it appeared to me that I had to. I bought a [cheap] PCI sound card that I needed to be non-SB because it would interfere with the mobo-SBVibra that I have. It is a ForteMedia FM801 soundcard with no information on the chips, and failing attempts to use just about every driver in Linux, I had to look elsewhere and found that ALSA supports it, just like that. It even has OSS emulation so I could continue where I left with the SB driver.
As ALSA is also GPL, does anyone here know why it hasn't been included into the Linux sound subsystem? It looks to me like there is duplicate work going on and not necessarily for the benefit of the general Linux user.
OSS is a commercial company that releases their for profit drivers when they are old enough for them not to make any profit anymore (it seems), ergo presently the Linux sound system is getting the crums from OSS, when instead we could have a very nice looking sound system like ALSA put into the kernel. I know there is more than OSS sound drivers in Linux, but those are pretty scarce and the cards pretty expensive :-)
Quoted 3 lines
Is it because of the history of OSS being the first to ever have Linux sound drivers, or is it the ALSA team that doesn't want to have their code included into Linux proper?
The reason is simple. While we are digging heavy into the new sound APIs, the OSS API is quite old (and anarchic) but stable. It probably fits more for the actual sound driver code developers who don't like to change driver every month because some internal changes occured.
We hope that we will have finished the most of our work for the 2.5 kernel tree. We are actually co-operating with the Jeff Garzik (Mandrake) to remove all glitches in our code which could avoid the code merge.
Quoted 5 lines
This is my first encounter ever with ALSA, and I am just wondering if there are technical (ALSA doesn't really fit well into Linux proper), managerial (somebody has to do the work and nobody can) or political (the ALSA team doesn't like the Linux sound guys or vice versa) reasons for it?
The primary key is probably time of the interface development (internal & external). Alan Cox had another opinion at the beginning of this year than me. I voted to include ALSA drivers into the 2.3 kernel tree to involve more sound developers for ALSA, but I was not successful.
Quoted 2 lines
At least there has to have been some talk about it, but I have never heard it and I have not before seen ALSA mentioned a lot here?
ALSA team hopes that ALSA drivers will be merged to the development 2.5 kernel tree.
Jaroslav
-----
Jaroslav Kysela <[email protected]>
SuSE Linux http://www.suse.com
ALSA project http://www.alsa-project.org
Quoted 3 lines · Peter Rasmussen
As ALSA is also GPL, does anyone here know why it hasn't been included into the Linux sound subsystem? It looks to me like there is duplicate work going on and not necessarily for the benefit of the general Linux user.
A deceptive appearance. OSS/Free development continues with the occasional improvements and additions to the kernel modules, within the confines of the OSS/Free API. ALSA is constructing an API that will "embrace & extend" (did I actually say that ?) the OSS/Free API. However, the guiding lights at ALSA are very smart people: the ALSA API needs work in many areas, which is freely admitted. I should also add that the ALSA drivers are superb even now.
Quoted 7 lines
OSS is a commercial company that releases their for profit drivers when they are
old enough for them not to make any profit anymore (it seems), ergo presently the Linux sound system is getting the crums from OSS, when instead we could have a very nice looking sound system like ALSA put into the kernel. I know there is more than OSS sound drivers in Linux, but those are pretty scarce and the cards pretty expensive :-)
Actually OSS (4Front Technologies, to be precise) has nothing to do with the kernel modules anymore. Kernel sound module support is under the direction of Alan Cox now.
Just to be clear, your primary sources for sound drivers in Linux include the kernel modules, the ALSA packages, and the commercial OSS/Linux from 4Front.
Quoted 3 lines
Is it because of the history of OSS being the first to ever have Linux sound drivers, or is it the ALSA team that doesn't want to have their code included into Linux proper?
I think ALSA will welcome inclusion into the kernel package, and I suspect they'll make it in a little while. The team leader, Jaroslav Kysela, works for SuSe now, and as the API settles there should be more impetus to include ALSA as the default system.
Also be advised: The ALSA docs need work, so if you want to contribute to the development, there's a job needing done right there. Furthermore, the ALSA installation and configuration could be made simpler for the newbie (though I personally haven't had any problems with it for a while).
Quoted 5 lines
This is my first encounter ever with ALSA, and I am just wondering if there are technical (ALSA doesn't really fit well into Linux proper), managerial (somebody
has to do the work and nobody can) or political (the ALSA team doesn't like the Linux sound guys or vice versa) reasons for it?
I hope I've addressed some of that...
Quoted 2 lines
At least there has to have been some talk about it, but I have never heard it and I have not before seen ALSA mentioned a lot here?
The Linux-Sound newsgroup has been focused on the kernel modules package. ALSA has its own mail-lists for users and developers. Check out the Linux soundapps pages for more information:
Best regards,
= Dave Phillips
http://www.bright.net/~dlphilp/index.html
http://www.bright.net/~dlphilp/linuxsound/