Re: Shouldn't kernel-image-2.6.x-y-z depend on alsa-base ?

[jdthood@aglu.demon.nl]

> Thomas Hood <jdthood@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
> > 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.


So to be clear the alternatives suggested so far are:

1. The two-package approach

  * oss blacklists ALSA modules
  * alsa-base blacklists OSS modules
  * alsa-base Conflicts with oss
  * kernel-image Depends on alsa-base | oss

2. The diversion approach

  * ALSA modules are blacklisted by default
  * alsa-base de-blacklists ALSA modules and blacklists OSS modules
  * linux26 installs alsa-base

Have I got that right?
-- 
Thomas Hood