[pulseaudio-discuss] system-wide daemon

Lennart Poettering lennart at poettering.net
Wed Feb 10 16:58:20 PST 2010

On Thu, 11.02.10 00:44, Colin Guthrie (gmane at colin.guthr.ie) wrote:

> > If people want to allow users unconditional access to audio devices,
> > regardless whether they are logged in on the console, then they can
> > add them to that group. That's fine. ACL certainly are more flexible,
> > but just adding someone to the "audio" group is certainly simpler.
> > 
> > Most distros support both CK/ACL-based access and audio group based
> > access out-of-the-box. And that's fine that way and not going to go
> > away.
> But if a good proportion of the audio hardware out there does not
> support hardware mixing, should this mode of operation be encouraged?
> I'd have thought that by enabling this way of working it's just
> ultimately going to lead to problems when such hardware is attempted to
> be accessed concurrently?

The "audio" group is certainly no fix for apps fighting for exclusive
device access. Note that by default that group is empty, so this
feature is unused by default. However we want to make things easy for
the cases where access control is not exclusively bound to the active
session. And it might even make sense for headless systems, or if PA
isn't used.


Lennart Poettering                        Red Hat, Inc.
lennart [at] poettering [dot] net
http://0pointer.net/lennart/           GnuPG 0x1A015CC4

More information about the pulseaudio-discuss mailing list