| 1 |
On Tue, 2006-06-06 at 08:40 +0200, Thomas de Grenier de Latour wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, 05 Jun 2006 21:23:58 -0400, |
| 3 |
> Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> > There are *many* applications in the tree that do not use ALSA, but |
| 6 |
> > work only via the OSS emulation. Removing this is a bad idea and it |
| 7 |
> > would definitely be blocked by the games team. Probably half of the |
| 8 |
> > packages that I maintain require OSS capabilities. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> I think the problem is that the "oss" flag is used for (at least) two |
| 11 |
> slighlty different things: |
| 12 |
> - in alsa-driver, it adds OSS capabilities. That's something most |
| 13 |
> people want, and should be enable by default. |
| 14 |
> - in most (all?) other packages, it enables optionnal OSS output. |
| 15 |
> That's something most people don't use and don't wan't enabled by |
| 16 |
> default. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> Imho, when there is no "good" global value for a flag, it means it |
| 19 |
> shouldn't be a single global flag (at least, until there is some |
| 20 |
> kind of per-package defaults support in Portage). So, what about a |
| 21 |
> local "oss-emulation" flag instead in alsa-drivers, which would be the |
| 22 |
> only one turned on in profiles? Wouldn't it makes everyone happy? |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
It would satisfy my requirements/needs. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Chris Gianelloni |
| 28 |
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead |
| 29 |
x86 Architecture Team |
| 30 |
Games - Developer |
| 31 |
Gentoo Linux |
Archives