Moving alsa to the kernel will certainly increase the projects momentum, but
do keep the framebuffer story in mind.
Heres what google dragged in:
http://eca.cx/lad/2000/Jun/0106.html
I would regret to see something like that happening to alsa. Please do not
compromise in exchange for acceptance.
On Wed, 28 Nov 2001, Dave Andruczyk wrote:
> >
> > As far as I can tell, my DMA and IRQ settings are correct. The relevant
> > settings from my /etc/modules.conf are:
> >
> > alias char-major-116 snd
> > options snd snd_major=116 snd_cards_limit=1
> > alias snd-card-0 snd-card-ad181
one thing we desperately need for the inclusion in the kernel is a
working and complete mailing list archive.
i expect many new people taking a peek at alsa development now, if
only grumpy kernel hackers seeking reasons why oss is better :)
the geocrawler archive can only be described as an excus
Alan Cox wrote:
>>On Tue, 27 Nov 2001, Jaroslav Kysela wrote:
>>
>>>If nobody has comments, I'm ready to prepare a whole patch for Linus
>>>against the actual 2.5.1pre code.
>>>
>>My only comment: ALSA has waited long enough. It's now ready for hardcore.
>>
>
> Go for it.
Well, no choice now !
> On Tue, 27 Nov 2001, Jaroslav Kysela wrote:
> > If nobody has comments, I'm ready to prepare a whole patch for Linus
> > against the actual 2.5.1pre code.
>
> My only comment: ALSA has waited long enough. It's now ready for hardcore.
Go for it.
___
On Tue, 27 Nov 2001, Jaroslav Kysela wrote:
> If nobody has comments, I'm ready to prepare a whole patch for Linus
> against the actual 2.5.1pre code.
My only comment: ALSA has waited long enough. It's now ready for hardcore.
-Dan
--
[-] Omae no subete no kichi wa ore no mono da. [-]
Well, with or without the option that you mentioned below, I'm not getting
any sound. Though pmidi and sbiload don't complain, I get no sound. I
can load /usr/share/apps/kmid/fm/std.o3 and
/usr/share/apps/kmid/fm/drums.o3 with:
sbiload -p 65:0 --opl3 /usr/share/apps/kmid/fm/std.o3 /usr/share/a
Paul Davis wrote:
>
> so do you feel absolutely comfortable in asserting that for all the
> hardware that both OSS and ALSA support, ALSA's support is more or
> less as good as the OSS code? i just worry that people who don't want
> to see this change will argue that ALSA must get all of its low
On Tue, 27 Nov 2001, Paul Davis wrote:
> in general, there seem to have been a lot more people working on the
> OSS drivers than the ALSA ones.
as others have said, this should change if alsa is in the kernel tree.
this is a development kernel, and in an odd-numbered release, nothing is
assured
Will that mean that alsa-driver will be in the kernel.
Where will alsa-lib, alsa-utils and alsa-tools go ?
Cheers
James
___
Alsa-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/alsa-devel
On Tue, 27 Nov 2001, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > I have an AD1816a based ISA card. It doesn't work with the current Alsa
> > (though it does work with 0.5). I have no idea how to fix it, or where to find
> > someone to fix it (aside from here). I have no idea whether it's a generally
> > broken dri
There is a point ALSA cant reach without beeing in the kernel.
Because of this, it cant be better than OSS in all respects.
Use developement kernels for what they are intended for. Use 2.5.x for
ALSA.
Regards,
Robert
___
Alsa-devel
Hi,
At Tue, 27 Nov 2001 20:11:42 +0100,
I wrote:
>
> I think OPL3 synth can be easily implemented on ymfpci driver too.
The ALSA 0.9.0 driver already supports OPL3.
If you cannot use it as default, try to add an option
"snd_fm_port=0x388" to snd-card-ymfpci driver.
If it's ok, you can use sbilo
At Tue, 27 Nov 2001 10:00:49 -0800 (PST),
Ken Arromdee wrote:
>
> On Tue, 27 Nov 2001, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > That's true. And not all ALSA drivers have been tested well on the
> > current version, especially ones for old ISA chips or SB (and its
> > compatible) driver. In such a case, "good"
At Tue, 27 Nov 2001 13:38:59 -0500 (EST),
Adam K Kirchhoff wrote:
>
> Currently, however, my Hoontech Digital-XG (yamaha-754 chip) seems to be
> better supported under OSS than Alsa. Both the FM synth and the rear and
> front channels are supported. Under Alsa, the FM synth is unsupported,
> a
Bob Ham wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2001-11-27 at 17:37, Emmanuel Fleury wrote:
>
> See, what you've done here is confuse "stable" with "developmental".
> Easy mistake to make.
Hum,
Don't confuse "developmental" and "crappy".
Easy mistake to make :-)
Regards
--
Emmanuel
My behaviour is addi
> On Tue, 27 Nov 2001, Paul Davis wrote:
>
> > >I monitor creative drivers, and they have not any extra features
> > >(except missing an user space linker for FX8010 DSP - different design of
> > >microcode maintaince). ALSA offers the wavetable synthesis for EMU10K1 for
> > >months, while the cr
On Tue, 27 Nov 2001, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> That's true. And not all ALSA drivers have been tested well on the
> current version, especially ones for old ISA chips or SB (and its
> compatible) driver. In such a case, "good" means "more stable" or
> "support more chips". That's what lack ALSA lac
On Tue, 2001-11-27 at 17:37, Emmanuel Fleury wrote:
> Well, I'm not very introduced to all this Alsa stuff right now, but what
> I expect from Alsa, before being part of the kernel, is to:
> STOP FREEZING MY DAMN COMPUTER
> I am not sure that Linus will be pleased about that !
See, what yo
On Tue, 27 Nov 2001, Emmanuel Fleury wrote:
> Bob Ham wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2001-11-27 at 14:18, Paul Davis wrote:
> >
> > Do you feel absolutely comfortable in assuming that it is neccessary
> > for ALSA to have its drivers in "as good or better than" state for it
> > to be included in Linux
Bob Ham wrote:
> On Tue, 2001-11-27 at 14:18, Paul Davis wrote:
>
> Do you feel absolutely comfortable in assuming that it is neccessary
> for ALSA to have its drivers in "as good or better than" state for it
> to be included in Linux? Having Linux do sound the ALSA way is better
> than ha
On Tue, 2001-11-27 at 14:18, Paul Davis wrote:
> so do you feel absolutely comfortable in asserting that for all the
> hardware that both OSS and ALSA support, ALSA's support is more or
> less as good as the OSS code? i just worry that people who don't want
> to see this change will argue that AL
At Tue, 27 Nov 2001 15:38:07 +0100 (CET),
Jaroslav Kysela wrote:
>
> On Tue, 27 Nov 2001, Paul Davis wrote:
>
> > >I monitor creative drivers, and they have not any extra features
> > >(except missing an user space linker for FX8010 DSP - different design of
> > >microcode maintaince). ALSA offe
On Tuesday 27 November 2001 14:18, Paul Davis wrote:
>
> so do you feel absolutely comfortable in asserting that for all the
> hardware that both OSS and ALSA support, ALSA's support is more or
> less as good as the OSS code? i just worry that people who don't want
> to see this change will argue
On Tue, 27 Nov 2001, Paul Davis wrote:
> >I monitor creative drivers, and they have not any extra features
> >(except missing an user space linker for FX8010 DSP - different design of
> >microcode maintaince). ALSA offers the wavetable synthesis for EMU10K1 for
> >months, while the creative drive
>I monitor creative drivers, and they have not any extra features
>(except missing an user space linker for FX8010 DSP - different design of
>microcode maintaince). ALSA offers the wavetable synthesis for EMU10K1 for
>months, while the creative driver offers only PCM & mixer capabilities.
so do y
On Tue, 27 Nov 2001, Paul Davis wrote:
> >> If nobody has comments, I'm ready to prepare a whole patch for Linus
> >> against the actual 2.5.1pre code.
>
> i think we need to be just a little careful how we approach this. i
> get the sense that many people feel that although ALSA has a much
> bet
>> If nobody has comments, I'm ready to prepare a whole patch for Linus
>> against the actual 2.5.1pre code.
i think we need to be just a little careful how we approach this. i
get the sense that many people feel that although ALSA has a much
better design than OSS, they also feel that the actual
> > If nobody has comments, I'm ready to prepare a whole patch for Linus
> > against the actual 2.5.1pre code.
Since there is no need for this patch to support 2.2 kernels, some
simplifications should be possible.
Duncan.
PS: I'm not saying that it is desirable to remove 2.2 support, it's just
On Tue, 27 Nov 2001 19:59, Josh Green wrote:
> > If nobody has comments, I'm ready to prepare a whole patch for Linus
> > against the actual 2.5.1pre code.
> >
> > Jaroslav
>
> I have some comments..
>
> Wooohooo!
> Yeah!
> Cool!
Absolutely... we are a
On Tue, 2001-11-27 at 00:32, Jaroslav Kysela wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Nov 2001, Dan Hollis wrote:
>
> > Now that kernel 2.5.0 tree is started, shouldn't we start pushing to get
> > ALSA into the tree?
>
> Let's go. Our latest patch against 2.5.0 is:
>
> ftp://ftp.alsa-project.org/pub/kernel-patches/
On Mon, 26 Nov 2001, Dan Hollis wrote:
> Now that kernel 2.5.0 tree is started, shouldn't we start pushing to get
> ALSA into the tree?
Let's go. Our latest patch against 2.5.0 is:
ftp://ftp.alsa-project.org/pub/kernel-patches/alsa-0.9.0beta9-k2.5.0-3310916.diff.bz2
The oss-move script (to cha
32 matches
Mail list logo
