Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sun, 10 Sep 2000 09:48:55 -0500 (CDT) | From | Thomas Molina <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] for PAS16 functionality for 2.4 |
| |
On Sun, 10 Sep 2000, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> In article <Pine.LNX.4.21.0009091441260.785-100000@wr5z.localdomain> you wrote: > > The enclosed patch corrects the Makefile and makes appropriate changes > > to various doc files. Please consider accepting this for the next > > kernel. This patch is against 2.4.0-test8. > > Aehmm. Your Makefile patch looks very strange: > > > -obj-$(CONFIG_SOUND_PAS) += pas2.o sb_lib.o uart401.o > > +obj-$(CONFIG_SOUND_PAS) += pas2.o sb.o sb_lib.o uart401.o > > Why do you remove sb.o from the object list? > The pas2 driver has no code to use the functions in sb_lib.o - > It has only some code to enable the sb emulation of the pas2 card. > Either you remove both sb.o and sb_lib.o and the pas2 sb emulation is gone, > or you leave it as is. Alternative: you can add code to use the sb_lib.o > stuff directly from the pas2 driver (this is the best solution, IMHO).
I know I misunderstand things occasionally, but it looks ok to me. Isn't that just an artifact of the diff/patch thing? I simply added sb.o to the line when I edited it. That's the way I've always seen diff act. It deletes the original line and adds in an identical line with what I added in. The second line above adds in an identical line with sb.o added to the line.
> > - PAS16 compatible. Please read Documentation/sound/PAS16. > > + PAS16 compatible. Do not enable both PAS16 support and Soundblaster > > + support since PAS16 support includes support for Soundblaster. > > + Please read Documentation/sound/PAS16. > > Why not - there shouldn't really be an issue with it. > It builds fine for me (and the various distributions kernel rpms). > And I doubt there is any runtime problem with that ...
No there isn't a runtime problem. Linus went through a phase recently where he forced people to clean up "warnings" during the compile stage. If you answer yes to both CONFIG_SOUND_PAS and CONFIG_SOUND_SB you get "warinings" like this: /mnt/hd/src/linux-2.3.99pre/Rules.make:267: target `uart401.o' given more than once in the same rule.
My change eliminates that by eliminating the need to include both. It also makes thing clearer IMHO.
> > - insmod opl3 > > + modprobe opl3 > > either works well ...
Modprobe seems cleaner to me. It's an opinion and it's in my docfile so I didn't see it as that big of a deal.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |