On 1 Jun 1997, Mark Eichin wrote:
> actually, a lot of us find the sound driver stuff objectionable too > (because it leaves us with practically useless sound code, almost > enough to drive one to NetBSD :-) I still don't have any way to use > *both* ESS1688's in my laptop (when docked), which should be *trivial* > if the module took arguments like every other module in the > system... but no, that feature seems to only be in the "commercial" > version. So no, "pretty common" isn't even close -- the OSS stuff is > just *another* glaring diversion from Free Software. I'm surprised it > ever got in to the kernel that way, but I didn't have any sound > support on any of my machines until my newest [refurbished, 3year old] > laptop... and didn't realize until now just how bad it was... Yeah, I found it equally objectionable when I was reading it over, considering a few other things I'm -VERY- surprised it is in the kernel at all. But if OSS, X-Free and QT all operate along similar lines, thats 3, there are likely many more out there that have similar setups. Jason -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .