Re: Shouldn't kernel-image-2.6.x-y-z depend on alsa-base ?
Thomas Hood <jdthood@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
> On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 20:40:40 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
>> Actually, the proposed solution that raised some approval was to split
>> out the ALSA modules, just like the pcmcia modules.
>
>
> I raised this idea on #debian-kernel and it was shot down.[0]
>
> [0]http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-alsa-devel/2005-March/002039.html
>
> As one of the ALSA maintainers, I have done what I can about this problem.
> People who want to use ALSA can install alsa-base which blacklists OSS
> modules.
>
> If a fresh sarge/2.6 system lacks alsa-base then this would seem to be a
> problem because in that case nothing enforces the mutual exclusion of OSS
> and ALSA modules. If linux26 doesn't install alsa-base then perhaps it
> should do so. Even better, possibly, would be to give the user a choice
> between OSS and ALSA: if the user chooses ALSA then she gets alsa-base;
> if she chooses OSS then she gets the (currently nonexistent) "oss" package
> which blacklists ALSA modules.
The kernel could blacklist alsa modules by default and the alsa-base
would divert that to blacklist oss. That sounds the simplest.
MfG
Goswin
Reply to: