Charles A Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > This is just my 2 cent opinion but both libasla1 and libasla2 can > co-exist without conflict.
why bother since libalsa1 and in kernel alsa-0.9 cannot ? > This being the case it would seem to me to be prudent to reintroduce > the libalsa1 rpm until such time as the majority of pkg requiring > libasound.so.1 have been rebuilt. no. 1) cooker is a devel distro 2) cooker is a devel distro 3) cooker is a devel distro 4) removing libalsa1'll make maintainers updating their packages faster 5) libalsa1 is useless with new kernels -- "il a ete brule au 28e degre" (the naheulbeuk witch) "c curieux, gcc fonctionne" (gwenole)
