I have a *VERY*preliminary version of the 1371 driver working with the
newpcm code.
Testing includes playing one mp3 track and adjusting the volume a few
times.
In other words I'm not making any promises.
If anybody really needs to play with it.
From today I will ever read VERY CAREFULL UPDATING
file :) Thanx for all notices...
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--Replied message--
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 13:00:29 -0600
From: Warner Losh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Edwin Culp [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL
On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 09:16:03AM +0100, Doug Rabson wrote:
I will be there and I'm happy to support anyone's presentation by
answering the 'hard' questions. I don't think I have enough time to
prepare anything myself but since the schedule is full, that isn't a
problem :-).
Just to throw a
On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 09:16:03AM +0100, Doug Rabson wrote:
I will be there and I'm happy to support anyone's presentation by
answering the 'hard' questions. I don't think I have enough time to
prepare anything myself but since the schedule is full, that isn't a
problem :-).
Just
Bill Swingle [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Do to the influx of new and valuable talk proposals that hit my desk
today we're going to run a third set of talks at the conference. This
opens up 7 new 1.5 hour slots. If you'd like to present something, please do
contact me. :)
Will the
On Tue, 14 Sep 1999, David J. Clark wrote:
Could you forward me said code ?
You are not the first person who asks me this question, so I take a
liberty of CC:'ing this to the list. The said code is located at:
http://www.freebsd.org/~wpaul/mac.tar.gz
and consists of a KLD module
Hi ...
I've got a -current of about a week ago .. when I boot in user config,
pnp is no longer listed as a command. when executing pnp .. it
says
"Invalid command or syntax. Type `?' for help."
Is pnp command no longer in user config in -current ???
Thanx
Reinier
To Unsubscribe: send mail
On Mon, 13 Sep 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This kind of thing, where there is no bug ... where the subject is a
request for a new feature, isn't this kind of thing the wrong way for
folks to be using the trouble reporting system?
Or is this the way we want it to happen? It seems to me that
On Tue, 14 Sep 1999 02:39:23 +1000, Chuck Robey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(Judging by the headers, this item spent a couple fo days getting from
Chuck to hub).
This kind of thing, where there is no bug ... where the subject is a
request for a new feature, isn't this kind of thing the wrong way for
