different from what? each other? you mean the confs (yeah that's why I pasted the links) or the actual cards (so that they derserve confs in different from SOMEHOW)?
and emu10k1 doesn't even have "side".
I know some of the confs use multi and some use front. that's my question/doubt, coz that seem to imply that some of their drivers are sort of "incomplete".
and you haven't been really making any point/sense tbh. i don't feel like i should continue any discussion/conversation with you. it's out of the scope of my patch anyway.
On 18 January 2016 at 17:54, Raymond Yau superquad.vortex2@gmail.com wrote:
Compare these these two conf:
http://git.alsa-project.org/?p=alsa-lib.git;a=blob;f=src/conf/cards/SB-XFi.c...
http://git.alsa-project.org/?p=alsa-lib.git;a=blob;f=src/conf/cards/CA0106.c...
BOTH of them shows that the four "stereo" ports they have exist as "device", but the SB-XFi.conf does not use the multi plugin to bind them to provide a surround PCM like CA0106.conf; instead it can simply use the "front" PCM, apparently.
These two cards are different, emu10k1 have "rear" device, "centerlfe" and "side" devices
but they use multi plugin instead of surroundxx use pcm.front
SB-XFi.pcm.surround40.0 cards.SB-XFi.pcm.front.0 SB-XFi.pcm.surround51.0 cards.SB-XFi.pcm.front.0 SB-XFi.pcm.surround71.0 cards.SB-XFi.pcm.front.0