<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/" /> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW --- - VLC audio track delay" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=50024#c9">Comment # 9</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW --- - VLC audio track delay" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=50024">bug 50024</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:tanuk@iki.fi" title="Tanu Kaskinen <tanuk@iki.fi>"> Tanu Kaskinen</a> <pre>(In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=50024#c8">comment #8</a>) > (In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=50024#c7">comment #7</a>) > > Same here. Really annoying for VLC user. > > > > I'm not familar with pa so I cannot say whether this patch is has something > > wrong or not. !!!!!!!But this commit broken the userspace!!!!!!! Should > > it be reverted? > > > > It's 7 month after this bug has been reported. Should the developer say > > something to show that this bug is not totally ignored? > > Sure, I can say something. The problematic commit implements a useful > feature, so it probably won't be simply reverted. A better fix is needed > (patches very welcome). There have been fixes related to the sample rate > updating since pulseaudio 2.0, so it's worth retrying with pulseaudio 3.0, > but I don't remember that those fixes would have been timing related, so > don't expect too much. Thinking a bit more, reverting the patch (or maybe commenting out the code would be better) is maybe the right approach after all, if nobody submits a better fix. Removing the code that was added that patch shouldn't really break anything, the only effect should be that there's sometimes unnecessary resampling, which is better than breaking the timing of applications.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>