As yota (ironical) wrote in comment #89: > Fix potential issue with multi-channel ordering when seeking/pausing if using OSS [25878] <- LOOK: ACTIVE OSS DEVELOPMENT IN 2010!!! THIS IS MADNESS! ;-)
...and clarified in comment #102: >Moreover I'm not an audio expert but it comes to mind also that OSS is >portable while ALSA is linux only, and so this choice damages various BSD >flavours and fragment the opensource sound landscape. ALSA is Linux only, while OSS - shabby as it may be compared to ALSA - is much more portable (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Sound_System says OSS is available on "11 major Unix-like operating systems"). So maybe we don't need OSS, but we (optional) need the ALSA OSS-emulation. - To not break the whole *nix Sound landscape in to a Linux and a Unix part - To not break many applications and games - To not harm the end user experience - To not be offensive to application/game developers which want to develop multi platform programs Blacklisting sounds like a compromise for me. But how does removing with no or only short-term announcing fits to the ubuntu philosophy to be "people's allegiances and relations with each other" (https://help.ubuntu.com/10.10/about-ubuntu/C/about-ubuntu-name.html)? In my opinion it's offensive to users and developers. Don't get me wrong: I'm sure there are reasons to drop OSS Support but please do it a long-term way to give developers and users the chance to prepare. Compiling but blacklisting dosn't harm anybody or anything, but gives an option for an easy workaround while still bringing the plans to drop OSS support into focus. regards Rechner-Tester -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/579300 Title: Please disable CONFIG_SOUND_OSS* and CONFIG_SND_*OSS* -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
