Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750878AbWHITyF (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 15:54:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751315AbWHITyF (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 15:54:05 -0400 Received: from mx27.mail.ru ([194.67.23.65]:57907 "EHLO mx27.mail.ru") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750878AbWHITyE (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 15:54:04 -0400 Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 22:53:59 +0300 From: Sergei Steshenko To: "Dmitry Torokhov" Cc: "Sam Ravnborg" , "Benoit Fouet" , "Gene Heskett" , alsa-user@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Alsa-user] another in kernel alsa update that breaks backward compatibilty? Message-ID: <20060809225359.24c90e09@comp.home.net> In-Reply-To: References: <200608091140.02777.gene.heskett@verizon.net> <20060809184658.2bdfb169@comp.home.net> <44DA05C9.5050600@purplelabs.com> <20060809160043.GA12571@mars.ravnborg.org> <20060809191748.7550edaa@comp.home.net> <20060809194403.5960132c@comp.home.net> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.1.0 (GTK+ 2.8.3; i586-mandriva-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2077 Lines: 55 On Wed, 9 Aug 2006 13:54:29 -0400 "Dmitry Torokhov" wrote: > On 8/9/06, Sergei Steshenko wrote: > > On Wed, 9 Aug 2006 12:36:23 -0400 > > "Dmitry Torokhov" wrote: > > > > > > You are confused. By your logic you do not need XEN at all - just take > > > a kernel version + alsa and never change/update it - and viola! > > > "stable" ABI. > > > > > > > I simply described how one ABI (ALSA <-> kernel in this case) can > > be stabilized, while new non-ALSA related features (and potentially > > unstable ABI) can still be had. > > > > If computer has enough resources, practically every ABI can be > > stabilized (if desired) this way - as long as the ABI is PCI slot > > related. > > > > And in extreme case once you "stablizie" everything you end up with a > system that is not upgradeable at all. > > > That is, I can, for example, stabilize ALSA-kernel interface choosing > > (ALSA 1.0.11 + kernel 2.6.17) and I can stabilize TV card interface > > using (whatever v4l + kernel 2.6.18), etc, > > > > But you are not stabilizing ABI, you are freezing a subsystem. Stable > ABI does not mean that bugs do not get fixed and new hardware support > is not being addeed, as in your case. > I did stabilize ABI - I can be using the same (bit to bit) audio driver regardless of changes in the kernel not related to ALSA. I can consider this whole ugly and clumsy construct as a "super" kernel in which by construction nothing changes in the audio part. That, I as end user don't care what developers break in the non-audio part of this kernel - for me audio part is stable. I let the non-audio part evolve while the audio part remains the same - even at binary level. --Sergei. -- Visit my http://appsfromscratch.berlios.de/ open source project. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/