> 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 ... > > laptop... and didn't realize until now just how bad it was... On May 31, Jason Gunthorpe wrote > 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.
I'm puzzled. I just looked over the sound driver source code and didn't see anything but GPL licenses in there. I agree that configuration is lousy -- who ever thought that hard-coding interrupts, dma and io ports at compile time was a good idea? -- Raul -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .