[Pkg-alsa-devel] Bug#467421: Bug#467421: Processed: Re: Bug#467421: alsa-source: FTBFS timer.c

[Elimar Riesebieter]

On Mon, 05 May 2008 the mental interface of
David Witbrodt told:

> Hope I'm not interfering too much by throwing in my 2 cents, but
> here goes....
[...]
> > from my testing alsa-source 1.0.16-1.1 fails to build with
> > linux-2.6 2.6.25-1.  Same goes for the 1.0.16 tarball from
> > alsa-project.org and a pristine 2.6.25.1
> > 
> > filippo
> 
> 
> I believe Elimar was trying to say that new 'alsa-source' packages
> are being prepared which _will_ compile OK with 2.6.25* kernels;

Indeed ;)

> and he is saying that kernel 2.6.25 itself is packaged with ALSA
> 1.0.16-rc2, but that means building ALSA _into_ the kernel and
> _not_ using ALSA in the form of kernel modules.

Can be build as modules as well!

> If I am not mistaken there has been an API change and versions of
> ALSA released before kernel 2.6.25 was released will not build
> with kernel 2.6.25 (without patches, and I don't know if anyone
> has prepared such patches).  I am in the habit of replacing the
> ALSA sources in the kernel tree with newer sources obtained
> directly from alsa-project.org; when I built 2.6.25 for the first
> time this past weekend I found that the last stable release of
> ALSA (1.0.16) would not work with it, though it works fine with
> kernel 2.6.24.

ftp://ftp.alsa-project.org/pub/kernel-patches/alsa-git-2008-04-24.patch.gz

> When I had built 2.6.24 for the first time, I had made a mistake
> using Mercurial and had obtained a post-1.0.16 version of ALSA to
> replace the kernel sources, and found that even 2.6.24 would not
> build because they immediately changed the API to support features
> only available in the upcoming 2.6.25 kernel.  I quickly checked
> out the correct ALSA sources for the official ALSA 1.0.16 release,
> and that build with 2.6.24 OK.

Debian uses vanilla alsa-drive 1.0.16 as well.


> The 2.6.25 kernel has been packaged with a version of ALSA
> slightly older than 1.0.16 (the 1.0.16-rc2 version in the kernel
> is a few days older), and it has been patched to work correctly.
> But all of the available Debian packages for building ALSA modules
> were designed for kernels before 2.6.25... though Elimar mentioned
> that new 'alsa-source' packages compatible with 2.6.25 are coming
> soon.

2.6.26-rc1 comes with 1.0.16.

> You have these options:
> 
> 1)  Just build kernel 2.6.25 with the ALSA sources provided with
> it.  Those are nearly identical to the official ALSA 1.0.16
> release, anyway.

will be 1.0.16rc2

> 2)  Use Mercurial to obtain 'alsa-kernel' sources directly from
> alsa-project.org, like I do.  These have no real "version" number
> to speak of, and are several months newer than the official 1.0.16
> ALSA release.  You can build ALSA directly into the kernel or as
> loadable modules this way, but if you build them as modules you
> will not have nice DEBs that can be installed, uninstalled,
> reinstalled, etc.  (This presents no problem that I know of,
> however.)

ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/projects/alsa/snapshot/driver/alsa-driver-hg20080506.tar.bz2

> 3)  Wait for the Debian ALSA Maintainers to provide new
> 'alsa-source' packages before moving to the 2.6.25 kernel.

Please be patient. We're on the way ;)
Elimar


-- 
  We all know Linux is great... it does infinite loops in 5 seconds.
        -- Linus Torvalds
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-alsa-devel/attachments/20080506/4905c842/attachment.pgp