Why are pulseaudio files present in Devuan?

spartrekus · 2018-12-13 14:40:50

Hello,

I think that that Devuan tries to be a *free* distribution, without ads, malwares, spying, NSA, and many beautiful modern Snowden technologies. But, Devuan and Linux kernel running increasingly more and more full of those things.

One of them is Pulseaudio, which makes Devuan not like it is described:
https://devuan.org/os/free-software

Chromium has no place here in the distribution. Why Wayland? This is not congruent with the *free* software.
Why Pulseaudio is still present?

Devuan is definitely not a Free Operating System, because it contains many Snowden components.

Devuan is actually not a free operating system, especially because it contains specific softwares.

How can Devuan become closer to a free operating system, like Unix (e.g. OpenBSD), and without malwares, ads,... ?

With best regards,
Sp.

Last edited by spartrekus (2018-12-13 14:49:46)

cynwulf · 2018-12-13 14:58:36

spartrekus wrote:

Hello,
I think that that Devuan tries to be a *free* distribution, without ads, malwares, spying, NSA, and many beautiful modern Snowden technologies. But, Devuan and Linux kernel running increasingly more and more full of those things.
One of them is Pulseaudio, which makes Devuan not like it is described:
https://devuan.org/os/free-software

Citation needed. I would really like to read about pulseaudio with respect to what you're describing...? Seriously what has Poettering been up to now?

spartrekus wrote:

Chromium has no place here in the distribution.

You didn't mention firefox...?

spartrekus wrote:

Why Wayland? This is not congruent with the *free* software.

Wayland is from the X11 developers (X.org) and released under the MIT licence (as with X11), so what is the problem?

spartrekus wrote:

Devuan is definitely not a Free Operating System, because it contains many Snowden components.

What are these "components"? Citation, links, etc...?

spartrekus wrote:

Devuan is actually not a free operating system, especially because it contains specific softwares.

Nonsense statement.

spartrekus wrote:

How can Devuan become closer to a free operating system, like Unix (e.g. OpenBSD), and without malwares, ads,... ?

Another nonsense statement. Most real UNIX are still proprietary.

As an OpenBSD user, I can assure you that chromium, pulseaudio and other software which you may find objectionable, can be installed from ports.

spartrekus · 2018-12-13 15:21:19

cynwulf wrote:

spartrekus wrote:
Hello,
I think that that Devuan tries to be a *free* distribution, without ads, malwares, spying, NSA, and many beautiful modern Snowden technologies. But, Devuan and Linux kernel running increasingly more and more full of those things.
One of them is Pulseaudio, which makes Devuan not like it is described:
https://devuan.org/os/free-software
Citation needed. I would really like to read about pulseaudio with respect to what you're describing...? Seriously what has Poettering been up to now?
spartrekus wrote:
Chromium has no place here in the distribution.
You didn't mention firefox...?
spartrekus wrote:
Why Wayland? This is not congruent with the *free* software.
Wayland is from the X11 developers (X.org) and released under the MIT licence (as with X11), so what is the problem?
spartrekus wrote:
Devuan is definitely not a Free Operating System, because it contains many Snowden components.
What are these "components"? Citation, links, etc...?
spartrekus wrote:
Devuan is actually not a free operating system, especially because it contains specific softwares.
Nonsense statement.
spartrekus wrote:
How can Devuan become closer to a free operating system, like Unix (e.g. OpenBSD), and without malwares, ads,... ?
Another nonsense statement. Most real UNIX are still proprietary.
As an OpenBSD user, I can assure you that chromium, pulseaudio and other software which you may find objectionable, can be installed from ports.

Wayland breaks the Unix-like operating system. There is little sense to bring Wayland as a replacement of X11, and it should stay in Debian and not be in Devuan (under free software).

There are lot of concerns about pulseaudio.

The best quote in short:

Both pulseaudio and systemd are literally FORCED onto users by the decisions of a few lazy and corrupted distro maintainers.

Chromium, firefox,... pulseaudio and other software like that should placed be in non-free or under the new "nsa" for your sources.list.

Last edited by spartrekus (2018-12-13 15:23:54)

cynwulf · 2018-12-13 17:00:40

What a lot of bollocks.

spartrekus · 2018-12-13 19:49:19

cynwulf wrote:

What a lot of bollocks.

Those are maybe so depending on each of us convictions and visions about Unix. The way Unix evolves is multiple and is allowed to take many directions.

Mind settings are based on each of us personal experiences about opensource and Unix.

By the end, every operating systems may look similar after many many years. It is law physics.
Example: sea plants, which evolve to same characteristic features.

convergent-succulent.jpg.990x0_q80_crop-smart.jpg

Last edited by spartrekus (2018-12-13 19:52:10)

Ron · 2018-12-14 00:19:58

I agree with spartrekus that pulseaudio is crap. I avoid anything made by its author.

golinux · 2018-12-14 00:35:14

Ron wrote:

I agree with spartrekus that pulseaudio is crap. I avoid anything made by its author.

The error is that he described pulseaudio as non-free software. No one dislikes pulseaudo more than I. But just as systemd is free software so is pulseaudio according to the license (if not the spirit). All his other complaints are also not true. So it is indeed "bullocks". There is no non-free software in the "main" repository. non-free has to be enabled in order to install proprietary blobs. Under certain circumstances, blobs are available if needed during the OS installation procedure.

cynwulf · 2018-12-14 08:51:26

Whether pulseaudio is bad or not, it's a very different situation to systemd. The main difference is that it was written as *nix software rather than "Linux proprietary", like systemd. So it can be installed and run on e.g. the 'BSDs, Illumos, even macOS.

It can be avoided - any software which supposedly depends on it can be recompiled to use an alternative sound system / server. Many people confuse the choices of distribution maintainers and new defaults with "hard dependencies".

The real story of why pulseaudio got such a bad reputation, is down to Ubuntu about 10 years ago. They, as ever, released a half baked implementation which caused many users a lot of grief at the time. Even Poettering described it at the time as the "software which breaks your sound" or some such thing.

golinux · 2018-12-14 15:37:51

cynwulf wrote:

Whether pulseaudio is bad or not, it's a very different situation to systemd. The main difference is that it was written as *nix software rather than "Linux proprietary", like systemd. So it can be installed and run on e.g. the 'BSDs, Illumos, even macOS.

This description is misleading because systemd is not "proprietary" in the sense of black-box blob. It is also free software even though it's purpose is to deny freedom. It's a paradox but one which has allowed it to not be censored by the FSF.

spartrekus · 2018-12-14 15:47:59

golinux wrote:

Ron wrote:
I agree with spartrekus that pulseaudio is crap. I avoid anything made by its author.
The error is that he described pulseaudio as non-free software. No one dislikes pulseaudo more than I. But just as systemd is free software so is pulseaudio according to the license (if not the spirit). All his other complaints are also not true. So it is indeed "bullocks". There is no non-free software in the "main" repository. non-free has to be enabled in order to install proprietary blobs. Under certain circumstances, blobs are available if needed during the OS installation procedure.

The meaning of "Free" can take several definitions.

One can be also "free" to accept everything in Windows 10. One point of view about meaning of free, since one has choice.

It can be harmful and free. A trojan can be made with source code available + with GNU General Public License, Version 3. Then, it will enter the stable release.

Last edited by spartrekus (2018-12-14 15:51:23)

golinux · 2018-12-14 16:48:07

spartrekus wrote:

It can be harmful and free. A trojan can be made with source code available + with GNU General Public License, Version 3. Then, it will enter the stable release.

Of course. But until you have hard evidence that this is happening please stop spreading FUD.

sgage · 2018-12-14 17:45:56

spartrekus wrote:

golinux wrote:
Ron wrote:
I agree with spartrekus that pulseaudio is crap. I avoid anything made by its author.
The error is that he described pulseaudio as non-free software. No one dislikes pulseaudo more than I. But just as systemd is free software so is pulseaudio according to the license (if not the spirit). All his other complaints are also not true. So it is indeed "bullocks". There is no non-free software in the "main" repository. non-free has to be enabled in order to install proprietary blobs. Under certain circumstances, blobs are available if needed during the OS installation procedure.
The meaning of "Free" can take several definitions.
One can be also "free" to accept everything in Windows 10. One point of view about meaning of free, since one has choice.
It can be harmful and free. A trojan can be made with source code available + with GNU General Public License, Version 3. Then, it will enter the stable release.

"“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.”

Perhaps we need to stick with one definition of 'free' at a time, or find a better way of distinguishing between 'free as in beer' and 'free as in freedom', among other possibilities. People say 'free' to mean one thing, and in their next sentence use 'free' to mean another thing. AFAIK, 'free as in FSF definition' is at least formally defined. But I agree, it's kind of a mess.

spartrekus · 2018-12-14 18:06:47

cynwulf wrote:

Whether pulseaudio is bad or not, it's a very different situation to systemd. The main difference is that it was written as *nix software rather than "Linux proprietary", like systemd. So it can be installed and run on e.g. the 'BSDs, Illumos, even macOS.
It can be avoided - any software which supposedly depends on it can be recompiled to use an alternative sound system / server. Many people confuse the choices of distribution maintainers and new defaults with "hard dependencies".
The real story of why pulseaudio got such a bad reputation, is down to Ubuntu about 10 years ago. They, as ever, released a half baked implementation which caused many users a lot of grief at the time. Even Poettering described it at the time as the "software which breaks your sound" or some such thing.

If pulseaudio has such a not so good reputation, why not to rewrite another one, but better?

golinux · 2018-12-14 18:55:22

spartrekus wrote:

If pulseaudio has such a not so good reputation, why not to rewrite another one, but better?

Why is an alternative needed at all? What's wrong with alsa? Though I've never tried, I understand that apulse can reinstate alsa functionality in applications that have a dependency on pulseaudio. Will need to figure that out when Quantum is unavoidable. There are notes in this forum and also on DNG.

spartrekus · 2018-12-14 18:57:54

golinux wrote:

spartrekus wrote:
If pulseaudio has such a not so good reputation, why not to rewrite another one, but better?
Why is an alternative needed at all? What's wrong with alsa? Though I've never tried, I understand that apulse can reinstate alsa functionality in applications that have a dependency on pulseaudio. Will need to figure that out when Quantum is unavoidable. There are notes in this forum and also on DNG.

Alsa is ok. Alsa cannot be avoided for graphical usage and multimedia from Linux kernel. Alsa takes crucial part in the kernel for audio.

https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.10/s … river.html

Last edited by spartrekus (2018-12-14 19:18:51)

golinux · 2018-12-14 20:03:12

spartrekus wrote:

golinux wrote:
spartrekus wrote:
If pulseaudio has such a not so good reputation, why not to rewrite another one, but better?
Why is an alternative needed at all? What's wrong with alsa? Though I've never tried, I understand that apulse can reinstate alsa functionality in applications that have a dependency on pulseaudio. Will need to figure that out when Quantum is unavoidable. There are notes in this forum and also on DNG.
Alsa is ok. Alsa cannot be avoided for graphical usage and multimedia from Linux kernel. Alsa takes crucial part in the kernel for audio.
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.10/s … river.html

That is a non-sequitur. I think that something was lost in translation. Alsa is here to stay. apulse just allows apps to use alsa instead of pulseaudio where pulseaudio is a required dependency.

spartrekus · 2018-12-15 05:42:55

golinux wrote:

spartrekus wrote:
golinux wrote:
Why is an alternative needed at all? What's wrong with alsa? Though I've never tried, I understand that apulse can reinstate alsa functionality in applications that have a dependency on pulseaudio. Will need to figure that out when Quantum is unavoidable. There are notes in this forum and also on DNG.
Alsa is ok. Alsa cannot be avoided for graphical usage and multimedia from Linux kernel. Alsa takes crucial part in the kernel for audio.
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.10/s … river.html
That is a non-sequitur. I think that something was lost in translation. Alsa is here to stay. apulse just allows apps to use alsa instead of pulseaudio where pulseaudio is a required dependency.

apulse is a tiny workaround, but it won't replace fully pulseaudio.

You may try to use a LInux desktop like Gnome, XFCE,... without pulseaudio. Gnome requires pulseaudio, so the user is locked behind (no freedom).

--
Gnome audio and more reading:
https://developer.gnome.org/platform-ov … io.html.en

Last edited by spartrekus (2018-12-15 05:49:05)

golinux · 2018-12-15 06:52:23

spartrekus wrote:

golinux wrote:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.10/s … river.html
That is a non-sequitur. I think that something was lost in translation. Alsa is here to stay. apulse just allows apps to use alsa instead of pulseaudio where pulseaudio is a required dependency.

apulse is a tiny workaround, but it won't replace fully pulseaudio.

apulse is not intended to replace alsa. It is intended to allow alsa to be used without having to send it through pulseaudio. For example audio will not work in FF quantum without pulseaudio. But I just uninstalled pulseaudio. installed apulse and sound still works. It fools FF into thinking that pulseaudio is there.

You may try to use a LInux desktop like Gnome, XFCE,... without pulseaudio.

I happily use Xfce without pulseaudio.

spartrekus · 2018-12-29 15:03:42

golinux wrote:

spartrekus wrote:
golinux wrote:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.10/s … river.html
That is a non-sequitur. I think that something was lost in translation. Alsa is here to stay. apulse just allows apps to use alsa instead of pulseaudio where pulseaudio is a required dependency.
apulse is a tiny workaround, but it won't replace fully pulseaudio.
apulse is not intended to replace alsa. It is intended to allow alsa to be used without having to send it through pulseaudio. For example audio will not work in FF quantum without pulseaudio. But I just uninstalled pulseaudio. installed apulse and sound still works. It fools FF into thinking that pulseaudio is there.
You may try to use a LInux desktop like Gnome, XFCE,... without pulseaudio.
I happily use Xfce without pulseaudio.

Is is possible to install xfce4 without pulseaudio, without manual "cleaning", in order to get the apulse sound workaround?

apt-get install xfce4 will give all pulseaudio stuffs

Last edited by spartrekus (2018-12-29 15:04:02)

golinux · 2018-12-29 17:22:39

Not sure whether that's possible anymore. You try installing parts of xfce4 from scratch without the meta package and without recommends/suggests. If pulseaudio shows up in a package's list of dependencies, you can decide whether to install it or not. Disclaimer: My daily driver is still jessie.

fsmithred · 2018-12-29 18:35:36

Are you using ascii or beowulf? Try installing xfce4 in parts instead of with the metapackage, and maybe you'll see what is pulling in pulseaudio. They might have added the dep because there's no more xfce4-mixer.

I know that Refracta ascii does not have pulseaudio installed, so I know it's possible in ascii, and I'm pretty sure it's possible in beowulf.

golinux · 2018-12-29 19:46:49

OK. I booted my pretty vanilla beowulf and ran this:

# apt-cache rdepends pulseaudio
pulseaudio
Reverse Depends:
  pulseaudio-equalizer
  firefox-esr
  xpra
  xfce4-pulseaudio-plugin
  surf-display
  speech-dispatcher
  sdrangelove
  scratch
  python3-x2go
  python-x2go
  pulseaudio-utils
  pulseaudio-module-zeroconf
  pulseaudio-module-raop
  pulseaudio-module-lirc
  pulseaudio-module-jack
  pulseaudio-module-gsettings
  pulseaudio-module-bluetooth
  cairo-dock-impulse-plug-in
  projectm-pulseaudio
  plasma-pa
  persepolis
  pavucontrol-qt
  pavucontrol
  pamix
  osspd-pulseaudio
  mpg123
  mpd
  morse
  minimodem
  ltsp-server
  ltsp-client-core
  ltsp-client
  lives
  libpulse0
  libcanberra-pulse
 |kde-telepathy-call-ui
  impressive-display
  gqrx-sdr
  gnome-settings-daemon
  gnome-core
  firefox-esr
  education-ltsp-server
  cinnamon-settings-daemon

xfce4-pulseaudio-plugin and firefox-esr are the ones that will trip me up when I transition to beowulf as my daily driver.

dxrobertson · 2018-12-29 21:29:21

Pulseaudio does indeed get pulled in by the xfce package. I manually install xfce via the xfce package along with several other xfce packages I desire. I do not use pulse on 1 of my pcs, but I dont remember if I removed or disabled it; unfortunately I do not have access to that pc at the moment.

On the pc I am currently using, installed xfce the same way; I can pull up synaptic and do a remove of the pulseaudio package and it doesnt try to remove anything else, just pulseaudio. But, if I try to remove the libpulse0 package, then several dependencies are flagged for removal; including xfce and much more. So it seems the libpulse0 is whats really dependent.

If you decide to remove/disable pulse, a nice xfce panel volume control is volumeicon-alsa.

golinux · 2018-12-29 21:50:59

dxrobertson wrote:

So it seems the libpulse0 is whats really dependent.

That is true even in jessie. It is similar to libsystemd0 that it really doesn't do anything if pulseaudio is not installed but it is a cosmetic/mental annoyance.

If you decide to remove/disable pulse, a nice xfce panel volume control is volumeicon-alsa.

Thanks fo the suggestion.

dxrobertson · 2018-12-30 01:43:28

To run volumeicon, simply enter it into terminal. To have it autostart on xfce panel, add volumeicon as the excutable to Settings>Session and Startup>Application Autostart.

The officially official Devuan Forum!

#1 2018-12-13 14:40:50

Why are pulseaudio files present in Devuan?

#2 2018-12-13 14:58:36

Re: Why are pulseaudio files present in Devuan?

#3 2018-12-13 15:21:19

Re: Why are pulseaudio files present in Devuan?

#4 2018-12-13 17:00:40

Re: Why are pulseaudio files present in Devuan?

#5 2018-12-13 19:49:19

Re: Why are pulseaudio files present in Devuan?

#6 2018-12-14 00:19:58

Re: Why are pulseaudio files present in Devuan?

#7 2018-12-14 00:35:14

Re: Why are pulseaudio files present in Devuan?

#8 2018-12-14 08:51:26

Re: Why are pulseaudio files present in Devuan?

#9 2018-12-14 15:37:51

Re: Why are pulseaudio files present in Devuan?

#10 2018-12-14 15:47:59

Re: Why are pulseaudio files present in Devuan?

#11 2018-12-14 16:48:07

Re: Why are pulseaudio files present in Devuan?

#12 2018-12-14 17:45:56

Re: Why are pulseaudio files present in Devuan?

#13 2018-12-14 18:06:47

Re: Why are pulseaudio files present in Devuan?

#14 2018-12-14 18:55:22

Re: Why are pulseaudio files present in Devuan?

#15 2018-12-14 18:57:54

Re: Why are pulseaudio files present in Devuan?

#16 2018-12-14 20:03:12

Re: Why are pulseaudio files present in Devuan?

#17 2018-12-15 05:42:55

Re: Why are pulseaudio files present in Devuan?

#18 2018-12-15 06:52:23

Re: Why are pulseaudio files present in Devuan?

#19 2018-12-29 15:03:42

Re: Why are pulseaudio files present in Devuan?

#20 2018-12-29 17:22:39

Re: Why are pulseaudio files present in Devuan?

#21 2018-12-29 18:35:36

Re: Why are pulseaudio files present in Devuan?

#22 2018-12-29 19:46:49

Re: Why are pulseaudio files present in Devuan?

#23 2018-12-29 21:29:21

Re: Why are pulseaudio files present in Devuan?

#24 2018-12-29 21:50:59

Re: Why are pulseaudio files present in Devuan?

#25 2018-12-30 01:43:28

Re: Why are pulseaudio files present in Devuan?

Board footer