GGI debate and etc.

Tracy Camp (
Tue, 24 Feb 1998 18:40:28 -0800 (PST)

I spend most of my time watching this list than paticipating in
discussions. Anyways I've watched the GGI debate over the past year or
so, and still am not clear why this is a totally diffrent issue than
kernel level sound support. I am basically in favor of the inclusion of
GGI with the option to turn it off mostly because I believe it will clear
up troubles with things like crashed DOSemu (and let me run X, DOSemu VGA
mode at the same time)... anyways I'm still not clear why this is
philosophically diffrent from the sound support. Sound supplies a generic
interface to a wide variety of specific sound devices though the use of
compile time sound drivers. granted sound hardware is not quite as
complex in variety or complexity as most video devices, but to me they
kind of seem to be the same thing. (though things like 3d sound are
around now as well....) The other thing I don't understand is why some
people see this as such a religious issue. If you don't like it, don't
enable it. True the GGI people (as everybody) should be extra carefull to
not duplicate code, or create un-nessisary modifications, but as long as
they can deliver on their promise - what is the big deal? Why not let
people give it a try. Yes I know they could just go and download it, but
for things to become truely used they are going to have to be included in
the main source tree. I often don't hear about people projects and hacks
unless it ends up in the main tree in some form. And on the same issue,
is there some reason the mac HFS filesystem code hasn't been added to the
main tree? seems like it works fine, been using it for over a year now
without trouble, and alot of people don't even know this exists.

anyways my two cents.

Tracy Camp | | I like Tea and Crumpets
The Problem is There are Problems

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to