Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2017 07:18:06 +0100 From: Sid <sid@bsdmail.com> To: "blubee blubeeme" <gurenchan@gmail.com> Cc: "FreeBSD Ports" <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>, Yuri <yuri@rawbw.com>, fjwcash@gmail.com Subject: Re: OSS Audio Message-ID: <trinity-3a733d38-cabd-49e4-bdc8-fe58a4b52efe-1513405086463@3c-app-mailcom-lxa16> In-Reply-To: <CALM2mEmpWmOyrfHku3diWrpeHLd0To3szUrutSsMt0LF=%2BEDFA@mail.gmail.com> References: <trinity-591c5f9d-357f-4ae9-88b2-d5d603fb8de4-1513379128533@3c-app-mailcom-lxa04> <CALM2mEmpWmOyrfHku3diWrpeHLd0To3szUrutSsMt0LF=%2BEDFA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> Sid; Fri Dec 15 23:05:47 UTC 2017 >> It's not that FreeBSD is limiting features, it is more that, OSS is a c= luster of complexities, >> when it is brought to FreeBSD, it is cleaned up, trimmed, and made effi= cient for this OS=2E > blubee blubeeme; Sat Dec 16 01:40:13 UTC 2017 > This is where the issue lies, FreeBSD's oss "compatible" implementation = did some things that went against the design of oss4 and re-introduced and = will see that bad audio > programming habits are carried forward into the f= uture=2E > This makes it hard to find and fix the root cause of the problems but in= stead of doing that, people just keep on creating new audio infrastructure= =2E =C2=A0 > Why? "there are so many different OSS implementations, not all of them compatib= le=2E Even Linux before 2=2E4 had an OSS implementation until it got replac= ed with ALSA=2E Sndio is standardized, it's the same on all BSDs=2E Because= it's the same for all BSDs it's easier for an application programmer to us= e it and not have to make dozens of exceptions in the code=2E" https://foru= ms=2Efreebsd=2Eorg/threads/60852/ This is an answer, but I supposed that OSS being an unstandardized tangled= cluster of code is not the answer you're looking for=2E If http://opensound=2Ecom/ is the 4Front you're talking about, it is simpl= y their oss license agreement, https://sourceforge=2Enet/p/opensound/git/ci= /master/tree/EULA, which is not compatible with a BSD or any opensource lic= ense, which is enough for FreeBSD not to include it in the base=2E Aside fr= om it not being incompatible, FreeBSD would get sued for using it in their = base, because that license says it can only be used by each person on one c= omputer at a time, and can't be redistributed=2E As I've mentioned before, = many projects took OSS, made it into their own, forked it and the licenses= =2E They can take those forks, but once they change to a restrictive licens= e, it can't come back here=2E Again, OSS has many implementations which are= a cluster of tangled sourcecode and licenses=2E If you need details on why developers made decisions on how they programme= d it, or what they got from it, then they'll have to chime in=2E Use sndio or portaudio for MIDI whenever available instead=2E In most case= s, developers will have to install that frontend into music programs=2E
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?trinity-3a733d38-cabd-49e4-bdc8-fe58a4b52efe-1513405086463>