Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2005 09:59:05 -0600 From: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> Cc: 4Front Technologies <dev@opensound.com>, freebsd-multimedia@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Syncing with 4Front Message-ID: <429DDB49.2060209@samsco.org> In-Reply-To: <20050601135747.vza4dgehcc8ks0ok@netchild.homeip.net> References: <429CB532.2010601@opensound.com> <20050601135747.vza4dgehcc8ks0ok@netchild.homeip.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Alexander Leidinger wrote: > 4Front Technologies <dev@opensound.com> wrote: > >> As 4Front Technologies gets ready to announce OSS v4.0 later this year >> (the 10th anniversary of OSS), we'd like to offer our assistance. > > > Since my personal opinion is to sync with the official OSS API, I'm very > pleased to hear that. What kind of assistance do you offer? > >> ALSA is way too complex at the API layer but still very similar to OSS >> at the driver level (naturally since they started from OSS!). We have >> developed a ALSA<->OSS library called SALSA (for Simple ALSA) that gives >> you some level of translation between the few ALSA-only apps and OSS >> compatible drivers and it's under LGPL and we can talk about BSD >> licensing it if you find it useful. See: >> http://www.4front-tech.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=296 > > > Since those apps which use ALSA most likely will be part of the ports > collection but not of the base system, I think this isn't really needed to > be adopted by us. SALSA can just be part of the ports collection too. > Actually,having an enabling API that is tied to the OS like SALSA seems to be is a very good thing to have in the base system. Why drive the ports team nuts with it breaking at the drop of a hat every time someone tweaks the kernel sources? I'm highly in favor of enabling technologies like this. It makes everyone's lives easier. Scott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?429DDB49.2060209>