Re: kernel sound

[Bernard Harper <nospam [at] norfolkpark.freeserve.co.uk>]

----- Original Message -----
From: <will [at] south-of-heaven.demon.co.uk>
To: <sheflug [at] listbot.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 1999 1:20 PM
Subject: Re: kernel sound

> sheflug - http://www.sheflug.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.
>
> Partitioning a drive is fairly simple, yes.
The problem arises when like me, you have a 13.6gb drive partitioned as
6.2gb for Windowz, a 3.2gb as a fat 32 drive and then use the rest for
Linux. Believe me Linux will not install as it come up against the 1024
cylinder thingy.
I only managed to get round this by repartitioning with Fdisk as 6.2gb,and
2 x 3.2gb logical drives. I then deleted the first logical drive with
diskdruid and managed to install Linux.
To be fair, Linux is far superior and I do like it.
So it's build a seperate Unit for Linux for me with a smaller hard drive.
I'm not giving up, just having a rest!
Bernard
______________________________________________________________________
> To unsubscribe, write to sheflug-unsubscribe [at] listbot.com
> Start Your Own FREE Email List at http://www.listbot.com/links/joinlb
>

Start your own FREE mailing list at

&copy; 2000 Microsoft Corporation. All Rights Reserved