On Monday 20 February 2006 00:12, David Lang wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Feb 2006, Lee Revell wrote:
> > On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 23:56 +0000, Alistair John Strachan wrote:
> >> Thanks for this info Lee, and understand I don't hold anybody
> >> specifically in
> >> the alsa team responsible but *deep breath*:
> >>
> >> Please let everybody know about incompatible changes to alsa-lib know
> >> about it
> >> prior to making the change mandatory.
> >
> > I thought it was already common knowledge that alsa-lib should be
> > upgraded when upgrading the kernel.
>
> it's not (at least among general Linux users, it probably is among alsa
> developers).
I agree, and should I not have had an SBLive Version Voodoo with Problem X, I
wouldn't need to upgrade, would I?
This isn't an acceptable solution. Upgrades that aren't subsuming an existing,
working codebase need to be explained. And I'll read that explanation and
decide whether to upgrade. That's how it should be, period.
--
Cheers,
Alistair.
'No sense being pessimistic, it probably wouldn't work anyway.'
Third year Computer Science undergraduate.
1F2 55 South Clerk Street, Edinburgh, UK.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
