On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 11:32:24AM +0200, Thomas Hood wrote: > maximilian attems wrote: > > >irclogs/OPN/#debian-kernel.2005-03-15.log:22:09 <jdthood> I am preparing a > >sound-base package that will allow selection between ALSA and OSS. > >Ideally this woul d be pulled in by k-i 2.6. Any chance of getting a > >dependency added? > > > >rembered your irc posting, so what's about the idea of that generic > >package? > > > > > > > > Ah, I understand now. > > The "linux-sound-base" package is now in unstable. It would be quite > appropriate for all k-i packages containing both OSS and ALSA modules > (viz., all current k-i 2.6 packages) to Depend on linux-sound-base; it > would also be appropriate for all other k-i packages to at least Suggest > linux-sound-base. This package gives the admin the ability (via > dpkg-reconfigure) to disable either OSS or ALSA so that one does not > conflict with the other. > > If the admin chooses OSS then nothing further is required. If the admin > chooses ALSA then the alsa packages should also be installed. ALSA is > the preferred sound system for k-i 2.6, so I think it appropriate for > the k-i 2.6 packages to Recommend or Suggest "alsa", a virtual package > currently Provided by alsa-base (but possibly a metapackage in the future).
Can these relationships be done in such a way that they exclude architectures that don't have linux-sound-base or alsa-base? -- Horms -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
