Re: Sound configuration not in initial install
David Webster wrote:
>
> Well Windows and OS/2 don't seem to have a problem with letting you
> configure your sound stuff right up front. How hard is it to add a
> sound item to modconf screen used in in the "Drivers Configuration"
> phase of the install?. Afterall, these drivers are all modules and each
> could have it's own documentation for configuring io, irq, dma, etc...
> if need be. We seem to have no trouble putting dozens of ethernet card
> configs in the "net" option. What makes sound so different?
Sound support in Linux is dependent upon the number of people
willing to work on the project. Linux's popularity has always
been with the server 'crowd', those wanting to use Linux as a
web/file/print server. Thus the presense of so many ethernet
cards supported in the kernel's config.
Personnaly, I don't know why they decided to move some of the
config out of the kernel, and into /dev and /proc. Start with
http://alsa.jcu.cz/ (Advanced Linux Sound Architexture), or maybe
someone on debian has a clue.
> If Linux is ever going to seriously challenge Windows on the desktop
> we've got be able to allow newbies to completely configure their system
> right up front without the daunting requirement to go through a complex
> kernel reconfig and recompile. The Debian Kernel-Package is a nice
> start for this but a lot of the complexities should be hidden and
> auto-recompile of the kernel with only the options the user has selected
> should just simply happen.
If we all agreed that Linux was 'gunning' for the Windows desktop
market then we'd all agree to the above. However, not everyone is
in agreement on that point, except that many *do* agree Linux is
competing head-to-head against Windows NT. Many developers are
simply *uninterested* in the desktop environment. Work is being
done (look at the ALSA website) but not as fast on the sound issue
as compared to work on the kernel itself. It all depends on the
numbers of developers and testers willing to work on the sound
issue.
Also, part of the problem is the current absence of a sound
standard for Linux. That's what ALSA intends to be, but that
means the people behind this are starting from scratch (well,
using OSS/Lite as a base, but their API will be from scratch).
> The Debian install script is nice (better than RH). But they should
> allow us to configure our sound right up front, even if it means a large
> list of modules in a sound option, much like what the "net" option is
> becoming. The inital dselect should then give you a very base system
> including the packages needed for a recompile and then go straight into
> a recompile process building the custom kernel from the user's initial
> options. (including sound). After the new kernel is booted we should
> then bring up the dselect (optionally) again with all the various
> package combinations as it is now.
That describes what many hope the end result will be.
> i know that is wishful thinking, but as soon as I get my ssytem finally
> configued the way I want it I intend to begin working a completely new
> installation system as my first order of business. Something much, much
> more familiar to Windows crowd complete with documentation that actually
> shows you how to do it.
Its not wishful thinking. First, take a look at the 'linuxconf'
project. I don't know if its Debian compatible, but they may be
already doing some of the things that you describe.
> i also find it quirky that the kernel-package documentation never tells
> you you have to edit your /etc/modules file if you add/delete modules
> from your kernel.or simply edits it for you. If you have new modules
> that require optional paraemter you also have to manually edit the
> /etc/conf.modules files (more nonsense). Plus the thing never seems to
> get all the modules copied to the /lib/modules/X.X.XXX path(particularly
> the fs modules) nor is the module.dep file ever 100% correct. I hope to
> maybe work on that someday, too.
>
> This "Unix culture" has a long way to go in the ease of use category.
> But no question about it the efficiency and performance is
> unparralleled. This stuff still has an onerous learning curve.
P.S. please CC me if you wish; I'm currently unsubscribed to
debian-user because of some email problem.
--
Ed C.
Reply to: