> I now, thanks to a little voodoo that was not self-evident, have all the
> sound stuff working for me, even as autoloading modules. Hopefully if
> someone is hacking the readme file they will consider including the
> conf.modules hacks (revised version) that I posted in another message.
>
> I am still concerned with the apparent precedent being set with
> OSS/Free. I know of no other kernel component which has the sort of
> shareware approach being used by OSS. There certainly seems to be a risk
> of a Linux class-structure developing, in which the publicly-available
> source is known to be inferior to a parallel private version. This seems
> demoralising and really substantially at variance with Linux as a
> whole. While I have no problem with private commercial distributions and
> packages, I think that everything in the public source-tree should be
> managed only with the public interest in mind. There is a clear potential
> conflict-of-interest if the same person manages the inferior public and
> superior private person. This can be and possibly is being avoided if an
> individual not connected with the private effort manages the public
> version.
Hogwash.
If you dont like the status of sound: Rewrite it. (Which is infact whats
in progress, thats why the new 2.1 kernels have completely modular sound
independant of OSS)..