Re: kernel sound

[nospam [at] south-of-heaven.demon.co.uk]

> Hm? Yes, I do recompile my kernel once I have sound up and running,
> but I figure out what's going on with modules. I believe that works
> with both 2.0.3x and 2.2.x kernels.

Two points:

Most (if not all) stock kernels come with all sound drivers compiled in
either monolithicaly (RH 5.2 does this AFAIK) or using modules.

If you can't compile a kernel yourself you should not be sysadminning
a Linux system. The stock kernel IMO should be for installation purposes
only. Beign able to compile your kernel is useful in many ways and should
be IMO one of the first things you learn how to do in Linux.
Trying to prevent people needing to compile their own kernels IMO misses
the point a bit.
What's the difference between Windows and Linux?
Linux is open source. What the use if this if you never recompile anything?

> Documentation is a problem. To get my SoundBlasterWhatTheFuckY2K (or
> whatever it is) running, I had to pop in a half-dozen modules, but you
> oughta be able to automate it. (Commercial OSS seems to have managed
> this pretty well, but I can't download that off Debian. ;-)

Documentation is definitely a problem. Standardization is needed pretty
desperately here. And you should never have to load that many modules with
modprobe. Dependencies are handled automatically by depmod.
For my card for example I have to modprobe cs4232 for sound, and opl3 for
synth. That's it.

> And it's definitely not obvious what order the various modules have to
> get plugged in, but again this should be automatable.

Use modprobe.

> In PPP as in sound as in everything, Microsoft extracts a
> compatibility tax from every vendor and every ISP. And they still
> don't always work! Certainly Windows works more often than Linux
> does. But given the resources spent on it, it should.

Linux will never be as easy to learn as Windows. It can be made easier
in many ways, but the two are fundamentally different.

> But that's ok, as long as your computer is an appliance, like a
> blender for making Margaritas, to you. I refuse to treat my silicon
> friends that way, though.

I think it's important to realise Linux isn't for everyone though. If Windows
does all you need, and does it the way you want it to, I can't see the point in
moving to Linux. Trying to evangelise Linux to the blender owners will only
get Linux a bad reputation.

> Epson wants NDAs; you won't find good Epson drivers in anything free.
> USB I dunno nothing about. Coming soon, I suspect.

My Epson 640 works fine under Linux. (Dunno if colour works, I never
have cause to use it). USB is in the development kernels (2.3.x) and will
most probably make 2.4 (wasn't this meant to be out by now?).
There is no HID support (Human Interface Device - pads and joysticks),
but keyboards, mice and speakers should all work. Printer, scanner and
modem support is in the works AFAIK.

> You don't have to partition the drive, although all of the current
> distributions except Caldera (which seems to be one of the preferred
> ones for fugitives from Windows these days) pretty much demand that
> you do.

Again, if you can't partition a drive (OK, the tools are a bit dodgy ATM)
what are you doing installing Linux?
Installing implies sysadmin-ing and that is not a trivial task.
Easy to use is not the same as easy to install/sysadmin.

I think people should examine the reasons they are installing Linux.
If it's just to play with it, fine, but make sure you know what you're
doing, and don't rely on getting Are you sure you want to do this?
requestors.

Start your own FREE mailing list at

© 2000 Microsoft Corporation. All Rights Reserved