Jack O'Quin wrote: >>On Sat, 2005-02-12 at 19:06 -0800, Kevin Cosgrove wrote: >> >>>On 11 February 2005 at 20:35, "Jack O'Quin" <joq@xxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Those of you who enjoy working with bleeding-edge kernels, please try >>>>Andrew's latest 2.6.11-rc3-mm2 patchset. I am hopeful that this may >>>>be included in the base kernel, soon. It would help for some of you >>>>to build this kernel, run it and report on any problems (or successes) >>>>with the realtime LSM. >>> >>>What version of ALSA does this use? > > > 1.0.8 > > Lee Revell <rlrevell@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >>You really don't want to run the -mm kernel, unless you really like to >>test every bleeding edge feature the kernel developers came up with this >>week. IOW, unless you enjoy your machine locking up. >> >>This is important for political reasons, not technical. It means the >>realtime LSM is likely to end up in the mainline kernel. It doesn't >>really need more testing, everyone knows it works. > > > Mostly true. But, Chris Wright and I did make two small changes > lately. They work fine for me, but that's not the same as having 30 > or 40 people try it on different systems. Since this version *may* > wind up going into 2.6.11 or 2.6.12, I really *would* like for more > people to test it. > > The politics is important, too. It wouldn't hurt for us to > demonstrate to the kernel developers that a number of us really do > care about this feature. Lee and Paul and I have been hammering the > point home, but a few more voices would not hurt. > > Lee is right about -mm kernels. Don't try it if you aren't > comfortable working with development kernels. Most likely, nothing > bad will happen to your system. But, there could be problems with > certain devices or configurations. Reporting them to the kernel > developers is a bit help. But, don't run it in any production > systems. Is the LSM patch, (in the same form as the one in the -mm kernel) easily available to patch and test against the mainline kernel? -Reuben
