espeakup and sound cards?
j.schmude at gmail.com
Sat Mar 5 01:04:19 EST 2011
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Arch's espeakup packages, just FYI, are using the git version of
espeakup with the direct ALSA option. I'd be all for getting rid of
it, and I agree about the ALSA API documentation. It's not only the
most ridiculously long-winded API I've ever had the displeasure to
deal with, but what documentation does exist is outdated at best and
nonexistant at worst. Quite honestly, I prefer the OSS API any day,
and even Pulseaudio is easier to interface with than ALSA.
On 03/04/2011 03:02 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 02:23:48PM -0800, Jacob Schmude wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
>> Hi Getting espeak to switch cards was no problem. I just told
>> Pulseaudio to direct espeak to my USB speaker and that did it. I
>> used pavucontrol from within GNOME to do it, but I believe you
>> can do it through pactl as well. That's one reason I like using
>> Pulseaudio, I can direct audio where I want it regardless which
>> program is generating it. I haven't gone into the espeakup source
>> yet, but I notice that espeakup depends on libasound. That would
>> suggest to me that espeakup is not actually having espeak do the
>> audio output for some reason, but is interacting with ALSA
>> directly at least for part of the process.
> The git version of espeakup does have an experimental option that
> uses alsa directly.
> However, I am thinking about removing this, because there is a
> setting in that code which is very system specific and the
> documentation for the alsa api leaves very much to be desired.
> What does everyone else think?
> _______________________________________________ Speakup mailing
> list Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Speakup