|
OpenBSD General Other questions regarding OpenBSD which do not fit in any of the categories below. |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|||
Looks like -CURRENT has a new toy..
So, doing my usual source-commits check.. I noticed this commit:
http://www.marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&...2327104788&w=2 Looks like OpenBSD has it's own sound server/mixer now.. Think anyone will write mplayer/vlc back ends to libsa(3) any time soon? |
|
||||
Yeeeeeaaah! Another useless audio shit, yeeaaah!
Use crossplatform OSS@FreeBSD / OSS4 or die.
__________________
religions, worst damnation of mankind "If 386BSD had been available when I started on Linux, Linux would probably never had happened." Linus Torvalds Linux is not UNIX! Face it! It is not an insult. It is fact: GNU is a recursive acronym for “GNU's Not UNIX”. vermaden's: links resources deviantart spreadbsd |
|
|||
Wow, such negativity..
They still have the OSS compatibility layer.. as for the official OSS4, that isn't ported to OpenBSD, and it shouldn't be either. What this allows for is a base ability to "multiplex" audio sources, i.e: instead of one program hogging the audio(4) device.. they can send data to a unix socket handled by aucat(1). Basically it's a base replacement for things like esd or aRts.. all of which use the OSS API themselves.. a sound proxy if you will.. That is all. |
|
||||
So in short it alows in kernel sound mixing of many input streams but only using new libsa and not OSS?
__________________
religions, worst damnation of mankind "If 386BSD had been available when I started on Linux, Linux would probably never had happened." Linus Torvalds Linux is not UNIX! Face it! It is not an insult. It is fact: GNU is a recursive acronym for “GNU's Not UNIX”. vermaden's: links resources deviantart spreadbsd |
|
|||
In kernel? no.. aucat(1) was retrofitted with a "server" functionality.
Let's look at it this way, on OpenBSD.. the audio(4) framework is independent of ossaudio(3). aucat(1) directly communicates with the audio(4) framework, libsa(3) communicates with aucat(1) via a Unix socket (in /tmp), if aucat isn't running.. it falls back to directly using audio(4). Quote:
Everyone happy now? |
|
||||
Everybody comunicates with everybody, but I still dont know what you are talking about
default: libsa <--> aucat <--> audio failback: libsa <--> audio ... but where is OSS in this stack?
__________________
religions, worst damnation of mankind "If 386BSD had been available when I started on Linux, Linux would probably never had happened." Linus Torvalds Linux is not UNIX! Face it! It is not an insult. It is fact: GNU is a recursive acronym for “GNU's Not UNIX”. vermaden's: links resources deviantart spreadbsd |
|
|||
It isn't anywhere, OpenBSD's audio(4) driver has it's own API.. i.e: audio(9).
libossaudio <--> audio(4) <--> audio(9) <---> Chipset specific drivers, etc If you read the man page DESCRIPTION. Quote:
|
|
|||
Further update, looks like they renamed it... so, libsa is now libsndio.. also, ports are already starting to get patches!
http://www.marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&...6721928989&w=2 http://www.marc.info/?t=122507731000007&r=1&w=2 From the looks of things, it coexists nicely. |
|
||||
Any reasons why they do not want to import OSS4 / OSS@FreeBSD?
__________________
religions, worst damnation of mankind "If 386BSD had been available when I started on Linux, Linux would probably never had happened." Linus Torvalds Linux is not UNIX! Face it! It is not an insult. It is fact: GNU is a recursive acronym for “GNU's Not UNIX”. vermaden's: links resources deviantart spreadbsd |
|
||||
__________________
religions, worst damnation of mankind "If 386BSD had been available when I started on Linux, Linux would probably never had happened." Linus Torvalds Linux is not UNIX! Face it! It is not an insult. It is fact: GNU is a recursive acronym for “GNU's Not UNIX”. vermaden's: links resources deviantart spreadbsd |
|
|||
Right, OSS4 is available under all 3 licences.. but the maintainer of all things audio, doesn't want a port of OSS4.
It's a kernel module, most definitely won't end up in base.. they don't like kernel modules. Also, they don't need to port it.. the existing interface works fine.. even if they did, OSS4 doesn't support stream multiplexing either. From what I can tell, the consensus is.. "It's easier to keep the existing framework, and merge features from the BSD licenced OSS4 when applicable." |
|
||||
From OSS4 wiki I get other info:
Code:
-- Transparent Software based Audio Mixer -- Allows applications to share the same "real" audio device regardless of what format is requested by the application. -- Ability to mix stereo and multichannel audio streams up to 7.1/200Khz/32bit.
__________________
religions, worst damnation of mankind "If 386BSD had been available when I started on Linux, Linux would probably never had happened." Linus Torvalds Linux is not UNIX! Face it! It is not an insult. It is fact: GNU is a recursive acronym for “GNU's Not UNIX”. vermaden's: links resources deviantart spreadbsd |
|
|||
You win this round champ, regardless.. my first point remains valid.
http://marc.info/?t=119976229400002&r=1&w=2 The topic was all about OSS4's BSD licenced release, Jacob Meuser, the maintainer, has already mentioned the fact that OpenBSD supports more chipsets with it's native framework. I count 22 in the 4.3 release, for various architectures.. some are even on i2c buses. The point is: They designed a native audio API they like, they improve it with each new release, and they've audited it for security. So, debate over... IMHO. |
|
||||
Quote:
I just want (propably as many others) that UNIX systems should use one crossplatform "thing" for audio. Currently OSS is most populated (and always was if you do not count Linux where they reinvent the wheel every friday). It may be libsa or even something totally new designed from scratch, but imho current best jack of all trades is OSS from FreeBSD or OSS4 (or prolably some mix of these two). Quote:
The argument that it supports more chipsets is very small unfortunelly, if I recall corectly even ALSA supports more chipsets, but we all know what mess ALSA is, and how greatly "crossplatform" it is also ... or should I say crossdistro?
__________________
religions, worst damnation of mankind "If 386BSD had been available when I started on Linux, Linux would probably never had happened." Linus Torvalds Linux is not UNIX! Face it! It is not an insult. It is fact: GNU is a recursive acronym for “GNU's Not UNIX”. vermaden's: links resources deviantart spreadbsd |
|
|||
You keep trying to peddle OSS@FreeBSD, what makes that better then OpenBSD's existing framework? commits go in every day.. improving drivers, fixing bugs.. originally, OSS was proprietary.. many operating systems used the published API specifications and wrote wrappers to their already existing audio infrastructures.
Just because they open sourced the "real deal", doesn't mean everyone should drop their own codebase.. one they've maintained for years.. just because it'll make 5-6 people who can find the differences happy. They have a compatibility layer, they have a native layer... and they have a new multiplexing layer.. many programs that have "audio support" also have support for backends.. as demonstrated by the recent SDL update, you can even switch between them at runtime. Again, OSS was an API... people used that API to allow easy porting of applications, as a courtesy only.. If you still don't agree with this, fine.. but how is it any different from FreeBSD's implementation of OSS? why do you also assume it's better? Eventually this will turn into a flame war, I don't want that.. to be fair, this is the OpenBSD section, and you are FreeBSD user, different philosophies are going to happen.. you're free to gloat about how better everything is in the other sections. (You know, the ones at the top of the forum index..). |
|
|||
It should also be noted that NetBSD is exactly the same in this regard, I believe OpenBSD's audio interface is a descendant of the work done in NetBSD.. including the ossaudio(3) wrapper libraries.
http://netbsd.gw.com/cgi-bin/man-cgi...4+NetBSD-1.3.3 http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.c...th=OpenBSD+2.2 http://netbsd.gw.com/cgi-bin/man-cgi...3+NetBSD-1.3.3 http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.c...th=OpenBSD+2.2 Often the two merge changes from each other, and NetBSD doesn't have a OSSv4 port either. From the looks of things, tracing commit logs.. and man pages.. it's been around since the very first releases of both NetBSD and OpenBSD. That's over 11 years of independent development my friend.. worthy of some respect. |
|
||||
Quote:
Thats what open source software is all about, whats the diffrence here? Quote:
Quote:
Better? Its just very good OSS implementation that works very good, you do not have to port anything if it comes to audio part of the port, it will just work. Quote:
The things we currently do in this thread is discussion, but I think that you are taking it little too personally mate.
__________________
religions, worst damnation of mankind "If 386BSD had been available when I started on Linux, Linux would probably never had happened." Linus Torvalds Linux is not UNIX! Face it! It is not an insult. It is fact: GNU is a recursive acronym for “GNU's Not UNIX”. vermaden's: links resources deviantart spreadbsd |
|
|||
Quote:
libsndio(3) could theoretically be ported to other systems, but in the end.. it's a simplified way to access all the features of the audio(4) API that might not be directly possible with the libossaudio(3) wrapper. I admit, I'm getting "protective".. but both you and Carpetsmoker came here advertising OSS4/OSS@FreeBSD as the only solutions to the Unix-sound problem. I'm not aware of the statistics, but many people use the Esd/aRts/Jack flavours instead of OSS directly. (Due to it not being a "requirement" of the API to concatenate multiple audio streams into 1.) What harm is there in having a base library capable of fulfilling the functionality of these.. GPL.. library? I myself don't use the Esd/aRts/Jack flavours of ports due to the often complex configuration requirements.. as a punishment, I can only listen to sound in 1 application at a time.. Let's just close this topic, I respect both of you immensely.. in many matters were likely agree 100%.. but it is clear this isn't one of them. |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
/usr is full (OpenBSD 4.5 current) | valorisa | OpenBSD Packages and Ports | 7 | 10th June 2009 01:28 PM |
OpenBSD4.5 current to current... | valorisa | OpenBSD Installation and Upgrading | 7 | 6th June 2009 09:26 AM |
Anyone Using FreeBSD-8-Current? | MetalHead | FreeBSD General | 3 | 31st March 2009 06:50 PM |
4.5 -current issue | roundkat | OpenBSD Installation and Upgrading | 11 | 28th February 2009 02:11 PM |