Yair K. wrote: > B. Technical: Is this is a good idea? > Well, the reason I asked him is that I think it would be much easier to get > OSSv4 support included in binary distros if a soundcard.h file was included, > and because gstreamer already includes a soundcard.h file. He suggested an > alternative - have the build system search for an OSSv4 soundcard.h in the > build system. IMHO, this would probably lead to asking distros to include a > soundcard.h (leading to same questions * 1000 distros).
Any distro that ships with OSSv4 would also ship the v4 soundcard.h. Similarly, anybody who creates an 'unofficial' binary package with OSSv4 support for an OSSv4-less distro would compile it with OSSv4 installed. So I don't quite understand under what circumstances you would want to have the soundcard.h file shipped separately. Anyway, the easiest way to ensure widespread distribution of the v4 soundcard.h would be to force it into the kernel by writing a patch to add (at least some part of) OSSv4 support to ALSA's OSS emulation. Best regards, Clemens _______________________________________________ oss-devel mailing list oss-devel@mailman.opensound.com http://mailman.opensound.com/mailman/listinfo/oss-devel
