ALSA in a 2.6 world

[Florin Andrei]

On Thu, 2004-04-15 at 22:42, Marius Andreiana wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-04-16 at 07:26, Warren Togami wrote:
> > Seriously though, in 99% cases the only way you will get anything into 
> > the Fedora kernel is to convince upstream to include it.  
> Yes, but that was not the question.

Thanks Marius, it's not the first time we're on the same "wavelength"
without meaning to. :-)

> I guess newer kernels include newer ALSA.
> How to update FC kernels with newer kernel versions, but also keeping
> fedora patches? (which, btw, should go upstream :P)

Actually, i'd take the minimalist approach and say: i'd be happy to be
able to upgrade just ALSA, while leaving the rest of the kernel alone.

> Replacing the kernel in src rpm with upstream and updating spec will
> create conflicts with existing patches?

Most likely.

I just realised that, with this thread, i re-opened the old and painful
flamewar "why the Linux drivers are so tightly attached to the kernel,
so that if i upgrade the kernel i have to upgrade all 3rd party drivers,
or vice-versa". Tannenbaum scoffing at Torvalds for not using a
microkernel, and all that...

Ah well, i was merely hoping i could avoid wasting the time required to
recompile the kernel when a new ALSA version comes out.

-- 
Florin Andrei

http://florin.myip.org/