Garrett D'Amore wrote: > Having a /dev/dsp, which we don't really intend to "support", is IMO > wrong, given the existence of "de-facto" standards.
My understanding is that we do intent to "support" it, but not in phase 1. I agree that the "internal, not in /dev" mechanism sounds like the right first step; my question was really about the predicted "harm" that would be caused by exposing it now. It sounds like (from Freeman's response) that there is no real harm, since the phaseI driver already supports the things that the existing 3rd party client applications depend upon. -John
