Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754471AbZJRIYv (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Oct 2009 04:24:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753725AbZJRIYu (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Oct 2009 04:24:50 -0400 Received: from mail-pw0-f42.google.com ([209.85.160.42]:37100 "EHLO mail-pw0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753437AbZJRIYq (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Oct 2009 04:24:46 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 1642 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Sun, 18 Oct 2009 04:24:46 EDT DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=hSs0v3WpOOwdN2wjDJq78+vVdyUClZNICRThu9ETgBkmh0Zc1psn+5T6mpiqUnoinI kxTrNmgNnire5G4+vVldQd5K53N1MlBa54fOEV4Xr1K4dafFgIHuFzw5y7LE3uTg2inh nwpjkAgUeRs/vSFQSr2yD7VuVnRczHzZX+05o= Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 00:57:24 -0700 From: Dmitry Torokhov To: Stas Sergeev Cc: Linux kernel , Dmitry Torokhov , Takashi Iwai Subject: Re: [patch][rfc] depend pcspkr on CONFIG_EMBEDDED Message-ID: <20091018075723.GI3935@core.coreip.homeip.net> References: <4ADA3593.4010607@aknet.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4ADA3593.4010607@aknet.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1065 Lines: 32 Hi Stas, On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 01:22:27AM +0400, Stas Sergeev wrote: > Hello. > > As most of the problems with snd-pcsp > are now settled and the major distros > are starting to unblacklist it and use > instead of pcspkr: > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=539767 > I'd like to do that sneaky thing. > The major argument for keeping pcspkr > I've heard, was that it doesn't require > the entire ALSA stack, and in this > case I think it is usefull only with > CONFIG_EMBEDDED. Right now it is a common > situation when the both modules are > built, and whichever gets loaded first, > works. > So can something like the attached > patch be applied? I think it is up to destribution to select the driver they want to use and blacklist the one they don't want. No need to change the kernel. -- Dmitry -- 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/