Feb. 13, 2010
3:45 p.m.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10495 --- Comment #212 from Immanuel <elmano(a)gmx.at> 2010-02-13 09:45:05 --- (In reply to comment #211) > The argument is that there is no evidence that winealsa cannot be improved > sufficiently to work well with Pulse. Until such evidence is presented, a > separate winepulse driver is unlikely to be considered. This argument is about as much bs as possible. 1) noting seems to have moved forward in this direction although I remember various changelogs claiming better support for alsa-pulse in the changelog. So either it would be really hard to fix or the wine-alsa code is just too ugly to look at so nobody dares to touch it. 2) if your argumentation is true, why is there an wine-alsa in the first place? alsa also has a wrapper for OSS. has anybody ever "programmatically proven" that this is not compatible? 3) there is a perfectly working solution (for me) with a maintainer and everything. what more can an open-source project wish for? > Wine was originally intended as a tool for porting win32 apps to unix-likes. > Should we abandon libwine apps just because most people use Wine to run native > win32 apps? nobody said that, what's your point? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.