On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 04:49:25PM +0200, Jakub Moc wrote: > Daniel Drake napsal(a): > > Jakub Moc wrote: > >> - The in-kernel drivers seriously are not an equivalent alternative, let > >> alone the preferred one, for stuff like hda-intel or any similar drivers > >> that are under permanent heavy development, at least for now. > > > > If hda-intel (or any other driver) from the kernel sources does not work > > on your system then you should file a bug. Yes, there are drivers under > > heavily development, this also applies to many other kernel subsystems > > too. We live with it. It's not as bad as it sounds. > > It not only doesn't work for me, it doesn't work for majority of people > that have responded on this thread. So, something's wrong there I guess? :) Maybe because this thread is a lot more interesting for people that doesn't have working in-kernel drivers? For what it's worth I'm using in-kernel alsa drivers with hda-intel and it's always worked just fine for me. > > >> - This is not a duplicated maintenance effort, it's simply needed to > >> have external alsa-drivers ebuilds, and it's needed to have them > >> supported as ALSA upstream won't accept bugs about in-kernel drivers. > > > > That's not true. I have supported in-kernel ALSA drivers for a long time > > and have never seen this be the case. > > Hmmm, I'm not entirely sure what are you responding to here? What I said > was that "ALSA upstream won't accept bugs about in-kernel drivers" - now > how's that related to whether you (or kernel upstream) support them or not? Is it really important who supports it? I think most users would care about their drivers being supported or not instead of who supports them. > > Additionally - forcing people to upgrade kernel for their sound issues > is not a solution for many of them. Kernel upgrades tend to break lots > of stuff on every minor version bump (and it's not only external modules > that upstream seems to plain hate and ignore mostly). Not exactly what > users would like to see when all they are trying to get is working > sound. Plus it's lot easier (and faster) to get patches into external > drivers than get them accepted into kernel. I don't think anybody is trying to force anything. Daniel have stated that alsa-driver should be supported for a long time. > > > Interestingly in this case, the in-kernel driver is a touch newer than > > the hda-intel one. It includes support for a few more hardware devices. > > Again these are only very small differences though. > > As said, it's not about code being newer or older, it's about having two > different branches of the code. One works for someone, the other works > for someone else. What's exactly the benefit from trying to kill support > for upstream ALSA code and forcing people to use in-kernel drivers > (beyond what you see as 'duplicated' maintenance effort)? Users honestly > don't care much about 'duplicated' effort, they want a working sound on > their boxes. I'll just repeat myself here as you've basically just repeated your claim about forcing people to use in-kernel drivers..
Nobody is forcing anybody to use in-kernel drivers. Regards, Bryan Østergaard -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
