On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 20:39 +0100, John Haxby wrote: > Lee Revell wrote: > > I think it's a problem that FC5 does not have an RPM package containing > > these modules. > > > I think it's a question of cost of maintenance. FC5 is currently on > 2.6.12.20 (although you might be forgiven fo thinking is actually > 2.6.16-1.2133_FC5). /proc/asound says that we have 1.0.11rc2 which is > exactly what's in 2.6.16. Someone could, I'm sure, package up a newer > version of ALSA and put in in a repo somewhere or even submit it to > Fedora Extras or Livna.
Been there, done that (for years) See Planet CCRMA[*], it already has packages for that (ie: out of kernel alsa kernel modules that override the ones that come with the kernel). > Of course, the difficulty with that is that replacing files in an RPM is > well-nigh impossible. RPM simply doesn't allow you to corrupt an > installed RPM. However, someone could take the kernel source RPM, > combine it with the latest ALSA build and create a new kernel RPM. Not really necessary. The kernel module utilities have a provision that enables you to override the "original" kernel modules. Just put your "newer" kernel modules somewhere in: /lib/modules/`uname -r`/updates/ do a "depmod -a" and those modules should shadow the ones in the kernel tree. -- Fernando [*] http://ccrma.stanford.edu/planetccrma/software/ > That's difficult though. It'll break other stuff. > > On the other hand, perhaps someone would volunteer to de-couple the ALSA > modules from the rest of the kernel in the kernel build so that the ALSA > modules can be updated and then we'll get to be able to install newer > versions of ALSA without waiting for Linus to pick up the next version > of ALSA. > > Whatever happens, it's quite a lot of work for someone. And while > there's a fair amount of noise on the alsa-user list there's a limited > audience for all that work. Is it worth the hassle? Put a bug in > bugzilla.redhat.com and see what happens. Or even better patch the > kernel build and attach that to the bug report. (Not you Lee, I know > you have better things to exercise your not inconsiderable talents on.) > > The alternative for the snd-riptide module under Fedora is to wait for > 2.6.17 to finalise and then for FC5 to pick up that kernel. We're on > 2.6.17-rc6 it can't be much longer before 2.6.17 final hits the streets > and then there'll be a QA delay before FC5 produces a 2.6.17-based RPM > and we should then be fine. _______________________________________________ Alsa-user mailing list Alsa-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/alsa-user
