[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: ALSA



On Saturday 29 September 2001 18:35, Hubert Chan spewed forth:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> >>>>> "Tom" == Tom Allison <tallison1@twmi.rr.com> writes:
>
> Tom> 'make-kpkg modules' ends with: if [ -x /usr/bin/debsign ]; then
> Tom> debsign ${KMAINT:+-m"$KMAINT"} "$chfile" fi signfile
> Tom> /usr/src/linux../alsa-modules-2.4.9_0.9+0beta4-5+p0+1.3.1_i386.changes
> Tom> Tom Allison gpg: skipped 'Tom Allison' secret key not available
> Tom> gpg: [stdin]: clearsign failed: secret key not available
> Tom> /usr/bin/debsign: GPG error occurred!
>
> That's weird.  make-kpkg has never tried to sign a package for me
> before.  Maybe my configuration is messed.  Or they just added it
> recently.
>
First I've ever seen it too.  I know it's an option but didn't pay any 
attention to is as I wasn't planning on making real Debian Packages.

> Tom> --- So, I've gone a made pgp key-set for root and am compiling it
> Tom> again...  it's asking for a passphrase...  and it's processed ok!
> Tom> Now to configure it I tried the alsaconf program and it's kind of
> Tom> hosed.  I think in the installation I created a file set
> Tom> /etc/alsa/modules/1.0 alsaconf created something in 0.5...  And
> Tom> that didn't work...
>
> Hmm.  Random question: which alsaconf package do you have installed?
> alsaconf or alsaconf-0.4?  I think that you want the alsaconf package.
>
I'm pretty sure it was the not 0.4 version.  I has a mention in the screens 
that I have to be using alsa version >=0.5 if that's any help.

> I'm not sure what you mean by "created a file *set*
> /etc/alsa/modules/1.0".  On my system, /etc/alsa/modules/1.0 is just a
> normal file.  Maybe try deleting it, and just running alsaconf.  It
> looks like alsaconf creates both 1.0 and 0.5 files.
>
I'll check on this.
> Make sure that there is a symbolic link from /etc/modutils/alsa to
> /etc/alsa/modutils/1.0 (I think that alsaconf should create this link),
> and that update-modules gets run (I think that alsaconf should do this,
> but it doesn't hurt to run it again).
>
I'll have to check on this too.
> I remember ALSA was painful to get working.  Unfortunately, I don't
> remember all the things that I needed to do.
>
I hope I can help!



Reply to: