> I don't think I wrote (or implied) > that you should write a good Alsa port for crapple or that linux stands > for > "selected few should write driver...".
Hint: writing Alsa port for crapple was an analogy, sorry if you missed that. > that's not relevant to what I wrote. How so? You have named me selfish for not caring about anything else than what I am using (in this case Linux/i386)? And what I told you is that I do not care for anything else because I do not have a capacity to contribute to anything else (so why waste away sleepless nights on something where I cannot make a bit of a difference?), but what I CAN do is to perfect something on my platform and then forward the code to you and people alike you who could use the code to port it to your own architecture and possibly even improve upon it. If I were selfish, as you are trying to portray me, then I would have charged you for it like OSS does -- I would not provide you with the code, and ultimately, with the opportunity to improve upon it, but rather leave you at my mercy updating the code to work for you when I felt like it [if I felt like it at all]... > so I am quite confused why you have chosen to answer in this way. Please > think about how other systems are important for linux instead, I am pretty > sure you can come up with the reasons easily. I did not say that the rest was not important. It is just not important to me for the two, already stated reasons (but here they are again, sigh): 1) I do not use them, and thus I can not help contribute to them 2) I cannot use them, and thus I can not help contribute to them So what does make me then so selfish in the first place? Should I care for everything and everyone? Sorry, but Linux is not a Greenpeace movement, we freely share, but as I said already, we do not do work for you (unless you are planning on setting up a big endowment fund for Linux porting endeavors so that people who will provide for your needs can feed their families)... P.S. Disclaimer: I am not an Alsa developer, and above example should be interpreted as an analogy (i.e. an abstraction for you to more easily understand my point)... ;-) Ico
