Re: FreeQt ?
On 1 Jun 1997, Mark Eichin wrote:
> actually, a lot of us find the sound driver stuff objectionable too
> (because it leaves us with practically useless sound code, almost
> enough to drive one to NetBSD :-) I still don't have any way to use
> *both* ESS1688's in my laptop (when docked), which should be *trivial*
> if the module took arguments like every other module in the
> system... but no, that feature seems to only be in the "commercial"
> version. So no, "pretty common" isn't even close -- the OSS stuff is
> just *another* glaring diversion from Free Software. I'm surprised it
> ever got in to the kernel that way, but I didn't have any sound
> support on any of my machines until my newest [refurbished, 3year old]
> laptop... and didn't realize until now just how bad it was...
Yeah, I found it equally objectionable when I was reading it over,
considering a few other things I'm -VERY- surprised it is in the kernel at
But if OSS, X-Free and QT all operate along similar lines, thats 3, there
are likely many more out there that have similar setups.
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to email@example.com .