<html><head><style type="text/css"></style></head><body><div style="font-family:Courier New,courier,monaco,monospace,sans-serif;font-size:8pt"><div>Are we talking about the same sinks here? I mean there should be one Alsa sink (the physical digital output) ie. reduce Alsa to a driver providing only hardware sinks, not software sinks (like rate converters, A52 etc.). On the Pulseaudio side, two profiles using that one Alsa digital sink is fine. I don't have any preference about the Pulseaudio side - I just don't think a user should have to configure a .asoundrc with additional software sinks for Alsa. If the profile changing is such that the user cannot tell the difference between a change between 2 sound cards and a change between A52 and stereo on a single digital output, then that's fine. Cheers, Mike </div><div style="font-family: Courier New,courier,monaco,monospace,sans-serif; font-size: 8pt;"> <div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"><hr size="1">From: Tanu Kaskinen <tanuk@iki.fi> To: pulseaudio-discuss@mail.0pointer.de Sent: Mon, 12 July, 2010 20:27:28 Subject: Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] {PATCH][RFC] AC3 passthrough support On Sun, 2010-07-11 at 19:25 +0000, Michael Rans wrote: > Frankly, I think it would be much better to have A52 in Pulseaudio > with switchable channel maps so that there's one sink. Why is it so important to have only one sink? What's wrong with changing profiles? -- Tanu Kaskinen _______________________________________________ pulseaudio-discuss mailing list <a ymailto="mailto:pulseaudio-discuss@mail.0pointer.de" href="mailto%3A%25e%25">pulseaudio-discuss@mail.0pointer.de</a> <a href="https://tango.0pointer.de/mailman/listinfo/pulseaudio-discuss" target="_blank">https://tango.0pointer.de/mailman/listinfo/pulseaudio-discuss</a> </div></div> </div> </body></html>