[ltp] I must rerun alsaconf before using xmms.

[Thomas Hood]

What a thread!  First I will deal with Eben King's posts.


Eben King wrote:
> My guess is that you're using devfs or similar.


There is no evidence that F.M. is using devfs.  That isn't enabled by
default in Debian.


Eben King wrote:
> Modules aren't important, files are.  Or rather, it's important that the 
> file be created before the module gets loaded.


Not true.  When udev is installed, device files get created after
modules load, or during their initialisation routine.


>   There are several ways to 
> ensure this:
> 
> 1. The right (?) way
>    /etc/modules may allow such constructs as
> 
>    before <some module> <some file>
> 
>    so that the file is created before the module loads.


This is not true in Debian.  In Debian /etc/modules is just a list of
modules to load at boot time.


> 2. The brute-force way
>    Run snddevices before the modules get loaded.  Edit 
>    /etc/<whatever>/init.d/S??alsa and run snddevices before the modprobes.


Bad advice.  If /dev is a static directory hierarchy then snddevices
only needs to be run once.  If it is a dynamic directory managed by udev
then /etc/dev.d/ scripts are required.

The Debian alsa-base package includes the required script.


Eben King wrote: 
> Get the levels set where you like them, then as root do "alsactl store".  
> Then after you load the modules do "alsactl restore".  You _should_ be able 
> to automate that with /etc/modules.conf but that never worked for me.


In Debian you should not edit /etc/modules.conf directly.


> Could it be the "/etc/init.d/alsa start" that is significant, and then ALSA 
> works whether or not its modules are loaded?


LOL


> > What must I change in my /etc/rc2.d/init files ?
> 
> Run alsaconf before the modprobes.


alsaconf is an interactive program, so how can it be added to a boot script?


> > Do you understand what in wrong ? 
> 
> Roughly that /dev is created without the device files ALSA needs.  At least 
> that's what I _think_ the problem is.


You have no evidence for that.


> > What is the better sound driver : ess, alsa or essound ?
> > I don't change any boot program.
> 
> ALSA, since it runs in kernel space and the others run in user space.


Presumably he meant OSS, ALSA, and esd.  OSS and ALSA a systems of
drivers (in the kernel) whereas esd is a daemon.  OSS and ALSA are
alternatives to each other but esd is not an alternative to the others
and in fact many people use esd along with either OSS or ALSA.


> To clarify, I think that's better because kernel-space things generally have 
> lower latency than user-space things.


Given that esd and ALSA are not alternatives to each other, this comment
makes no sense.

It has been a long time since I saw so much misinformation in a single
thread.
-- 
Thomas Hood <jdthood@yahoo.co.uk>