On 06.01.2009 06:10, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Conrad Meyer wrote:
Why not put that work into Fedora / RPM Fusion? Seems a waste to
contribute to an incompatible 3rd-party repo.
Fedora does not allow kernel modules, and I think RPM Fusion is also the
wrong place for experimental upgrades to modules which are included in
Fedora kernels.
Tend to agree here. Getting the fixes into the Fedora-Kernel is the way
forward. As that's what cebbert did with the latest F10 kernels afaics:
$ rpm -q kernel-2.6.27.9-159.fc10.x86_64 --changelog | grep -B 1 -A 5 -i
1.0.18
* Mo Dez 08 2008 Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@xxxxxxxxxx> 2.6.27.7-139
- ALSA 1.0.18a
Dropped patches:
linux-2.6-alsa-ac97-whitelist.patch
linux-2.6-alsa-ac97-whitelist-AD1981B.patch
linux-2.6-alsa-revo51-headphone.patch
linux-2.6-olpc-speaker-out.patch
thx for that cebbert!
ALSA snapshots are something for an unstable repository,
which neither Fedora nor RPM Fusion have. (Kinda like the stuff in
kde-redhat unstable.)
*Hint, hint:* A lot of people requested a RPM Fusion unstable repo (and
I think it would be good to have one), but nobody stepped forwarded yet
to lay the groundwork for it -- e.g. discuss layout, rules, infra, and
all those other details that need to be sorted out before it such a repo
is started.
So in this case, putting them into
ATrpms's "bleeding" repo makes a lot of sense.
Normally yes, but not if the latest Fedora kernel already includes the
same Alsa, then providing (nearly) the same in a different place is just
wasting time and leads to confusion among users.
CU
knurd
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
