Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 93

Thread: Wine Developers Fight Over PulseAudio Driver

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,105

    Default Wine Developers Fight Over PulseAudio Driver

    Phoronix: Wine Developers Fight Over PulseAudio Driver

    It's not yet time for another Wine development release, but there's a heated discussion to point out on the development list concerning a PulseAudio driver for Wine...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTEyODM

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    148

    Default

    pulseaudio : a fix for a problem that didn't exist. (not completely true, but a wrong fix anyhow : fixing something by adding a layer of complexity is plain wrong)
    I hate pulseAudio, for me it caused nothing but trouble (HTPC, desktop and laptop). Using pure ALSA hasn't yet let me down. The craziness it allows me to do is everything anyone can ask for (I even used it to stream audio of a movei to a different PC). Yes it takes a day of digging through docs/tutorials, but it IS possible.
    Also when using pulse on a relatively good sound system, I got the feeling that it somehow distorted the sound; I'll have to do an analysis at some point...
    And don't get me started on digital passthrough.

    rant off...

    Serafean

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,600

    Default

    I love PulseAudio, combined with VeroMix it's extremely easy to manage everything related to sound, and the sound recording quality has jumped up immensely since I started using it. So a PulseAudio driver in Wine is very important for me - it would solve multiple sound quality issues. For instance, if I set PulseAudio to use the traditional interrupt-based scheduling method, then everything works correctly, except for Wine, which plays corrupted sound and everything runs in twice the speed (crazy!). And if it's set to the new timer-based method, Wine works fine, yet VLC has corrupted sound. Earlier there also was an issue with sound quality that way, but it's fixed since PA 2.0. Any problems people may be having these days with PA is just because of misconfiguration. "man pulse-daemon.conf" is your friend!

    So I don't care which PA driver goes into Wine, as long as it gets there already!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    462

    Default

    Please, please, please, put in Pulse Audio in Wine...!!! It's the advance way to go.

    Yeah I'm aware there is a PA Wine version PPA on launchpad.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Brasil
    Posts
    43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Serafean View Post
    pulseaudio : a fix for a problem that didn't exist. (not completely true, but a wrong fix anyhow : fixing something by adding a layer of complexity is plain wrong)
    I hate pulseAudio, for me it caused nothing but trouble (HTPC, desktop and laptop). Using pure ALSA hasn't yet let me down. The craziness it allows me to do is everything anyone can ask for (I even used it to stream audio of a movei to a different PC). Yes it takes a day of digging through docs/tutorials, but it IS possible.
    Also when using pulse on a relatively good sound system, I got the feeling that it somehow distorted the sound; I'll have to do an analysis at some point...
    And don't get me started on digital passthrough.

    rant off...

    Serafean
    Pulseaudio does not adds another layer of complexity. All it does is replace alsa userspace, that is in fact, very badly maintained and buggy. Pulseaudio, alsa userspace and Jack leverages the actual driver implementation to the alsa kernel modules.

    The problem comes when you want to use more than one together...

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,798

    Default

    PA exists due to ALSA's shortcomings. If the ALSA devs had gotten it right, there would never have been a need for PA. Unfortunately, ALSA didn't get it right, and now we have to deal with two low-level layers of audio instead of just one. What a mess. ALSA should have learned from OS X and Windows about how to do it right.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    462

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RealNC View Post
    PA exists due to ALSA's shortcomings. If the ALSA devs had gotten it right, there would never have been a need for PA. Unfortunately, ALSA didn't get it right, and now we have to deal with two low-level layers of audio instead of just one. What a mess. ALSA should have learned from OS X and Windows about how to do it right.
    It makes sense to have a layer to hardware. It allows other top layers like PA to compete. The structure also allows for ALSA to be replaced and keep top layers still relative.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,798

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by e8hffff View Post
    It makes sense to have a layer to hardware. It allows other top layers like PA to compete.
    There should be no competition. There should only be one API. Top layers should be things like SDL, OpenAL, PortAudio, stuff like that. Third-party low-level APIs like PA should not exist. The existence of PA is proof of Linux's failure in audio.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    119

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RealNC View Post
    PA exists due to ALSA's shortcomings. If the ALSA devs had gotten it right, there would never have been a need for PA. Unfortunately, ALSA didn't get it right, and now we have to deal with two low-level layers of audio instead of just one. What a mess. ALSA should have learned from OS X and Windows about how to do it right.
    Windows (starting with vista) also runs a sound server that does similar stuff to what PA does but has less features. I can't speak to how the OS X audio system works as I have basically never used it let alone looked into how it worked.

    Also, for those who are complainging about having one more API to target: Microsoft provides WASAPI DirectSound/DirectMusic, Media Foundation and Windows multimedia waveXxx and mixerXxx functions by default. This is beofore adding all of the third-party stuff like ASIO, gstreamer, phonon, SDL, etc.

    I have found PA to be a huge benefit, running multiple sound devices or trying to do per-application volume control without it is painful to say the least.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,798

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ShadowBane View Post
    Windows (starting with vista) also runs a sound server that does similar stuff to what PA does but has less features. I can't speak to how the OS X audio system works as I have basically never used it let alone looked into how it worked.
    Applications don't have to deal with it. Whatever it does, it does it transparently.

    Also, for those who are complainging about having one more API to target: Microsoft provides WASAPI DirectSound/DirectMusic, Media Foundation and Windows multimedia waveXxx and mixerXxx functions by default.
    This is backwards compatibility stuff. ALSA for example also supports OSS. Nothing wrong with that. If Windows wouldn't support DS/DM, Windows XP games wouldn't run anymore, and if ALSA wouldn't support OSS, old Linux games/apps wouldn't run anymore either.

    This is beofore adding all of the third-party stuff like ASIO, gstreamer, phonon, SDL, etc.
    They serve a completely different purpose than what PulseAudio does.

    I have found PA to be a huge benefit, running multiple sound devices or trying to do per-application volume control without it is painful to say the least.
    All stuff that ALSA should be handling to begin with.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •