On Tue, 24 Jan 2006, Lee Revell wrote:
On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 09:37 -0800, Bill Unruh wrote:
It might be, but it in general is not. It is not possible for the
average
user to just recompile. He almost certainly did not install the
development
stuff when he installed Linux. He probably did not install the kernel
source when he installed linux. So, before he can do "make" he has to
install a HUGE list of development programs and libraries and he has
to
find the kernel source and config files for his particular version of
Linux. In the process he has to resolve a bunch of dependencies, by
which
time he is screaming. Then he can finally do the make, and the make
install.
Why in the hell are all these end users having to compile the kernel to
get their sound working? 99.99% of users should never have to compile
anything. Sounds like the distros are doing a piss poor job, or else
people insist on buying bleeding edge hardware that hasn't been on the
market long enough for us to write a working driver.
AAgrhaheh. The claim from you was that it is easy for a user to update the
drivers for a new kernel, or install new drivers which had been developed
to a new kernel. Just three lines-- untar, configure and make. I point out
that it is NOT that easy. It is that easy only if the user's system has
been set up as a development environment. The whole premise was "the user
has a new kernel or the user has a new driver for his new soundcard. Why
cannot the user not simply find a precompiled version for all 2.6.x kernels
and install it, instead of having to have a version for every single
possible version of the kernel, or instead of having to compile it
himself." This discussion also began from the difficulties that sound card
manufacturers have in supporting Linux. They cannot simply include a binary
driver module which the user can install on his system. This is true whether
they
include source code or not.
This is an impediment to manufacturer's supporting Linux. If the
manufacturer has to include 700 versions of his drivers and tell the user
exactly how to determine the version of the user's kernel and figure out
which of the 700 versions to install, or tell the user how to set up a
developement environment on his system, download the kernel source for his
particular kernel and then compile and install it ( which as you said is
the easy part), it is going to impede the best will in the world of the
manufacturer to support Linux.
Bad support such as -- Here is the source code. Go off and figure out how to
install this on your kernel.-- is far worse than no support at all as far
as most manufacturers are concerned.
Ie, this is a problem not just for manufacturers who do not want to include
driver source code for whatever reason. It is one for manufacturers who
behave like good Linux citizens as well.
And "Do not buy that new sound card-- wait a year or two or three until the
distribution you like gets around to including that card in their
distribution" does not seem like an adequate response.
Now, if there is a technical reason why it is very difficult to set up the
module system so as to enable one binary to run on all say 2.6.x kernels,
that is one thing. If it is bloody mindedness on the developer's part (
that would make it too easy for manufacturers to develop binary only
drivers) it is another issue. I would like to know which it is.
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Alsa-user mailing list
Alsa-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/alsa-user
