Hallo, Florin Andrei hat gesagt: // Florin Andrei wrote: > On Sun, 2003-10-12 at 06:32, Frank Barknecht wrote: > > > > just a short information question: Is it true, that Redhat does not > > provide any ALSA packages themselves so people who want to run some of > > the many ALSA applications on Redhat will have to use third-party > > rpm's like Fernando's or from freshrpms.net? Is this really true? > > yes > > But freshrpms.net works pretty damn well, and PlanetCCRMA all the same, > and the installation process is very simple. Thanks for that information. I also found and recommended to try the packages from freshrpms. Glad that they do indeed work (couldn't really test them myself, as I use Debian). > > If yes, does someone know what RH's plans are regarding ALSA on > > kernel 2.6? > > Recent discussions on the Red Hat development forums have pointed out > that, since 2.6 will certainly include ALSA, then that functionality > will automagically appear in RH once the kernel version will be bumped > up. Which it only makes sense, if you think of it. Well, I think it would have been an advantage for RH if ALSA had been included as an option prior to 2.6. ALSA is not only the kernel modules, instead libasound and the alsa-utils are an integral part in getting an ALSA based system to work. As a distributor Redhat sooner or later will have to (or want to) provide configuration tools that fit into their own system. Redhat cannot get away with just compiling another set of sound modules. ALSA apps are needed as well as another documentation. All these things can be quite tricky, if you leave the linux-audio-user|dev and try to reach the wider target audience of a general distribution like Redhat or Suse. But I'm glad to hear that Redhat will probably go ALSA with 2.6 (I feard that the would still have gone the OSS path). I'm confident, that this will be quite a push for ALSA support in applications. ciao -- Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__