"Randolph S. Kahle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, 2002-01-01 at 12:33, csj wrote: > > On Wednesday 02 January 2002 01:53, Randolph S. Kahle wrote: > > > I started researching how to get sound working on my machine and I am > > > confused about the following: > > > > > > * ALSA > > > > > > * OSS > > > > You probably know what the letters stands for. The practical difference > > between the two is that OSS (the lite version in any case) is in the > > kernel source. ALSA is supposed to be the future of Linux sound, but as > > of now you have to go the extra mile/km of installing some extra > > packages. OSS, if you're lucky, should work out oft the box. To > > maintain compatibility with the OSS majority, ALSA has an OSS emulation > > layer. Use that if you can't get your favorite video player to work > > with ALSA proper (that is you can do "videoplayer --audio OSS" instead > > of "videoplayer --audio ALSA"). > > > > -- > > Thank you. > > If I want to focus on learning one thing related to sound (that will be > valid now and for the future), I should focus on ALSA, even if it means > a little extra work right now.
I would focus on whatever works and not worry about which will be used in the future. I don't think there's much to learn from using ALSA, other than learning 'make-kpkg modules_image'. The SB AWE64 is an older sound card and should be well supported by the OSS drivers. I would just stick with those until ALSA is finally integrated into the kernel source (should happen soon in the 2.5.x development kernels). -- Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bignachos.com
