From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rene Herman Subject: Re: Can someone verify support for "AzTech Sound Galaxy Nova 16 Extra II-3D - using AZT-2316/R Chipset - FCC-ID:I38-MMSN846" ? Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 11:22:56 +0200 Message-ID: <464C1EF0.2080809@gmail.com> References: <20070517084847.550D91CE303@ws1-6.us4.outblaze.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from smtpq2.groni1.gr.home.nl (smtpq2.groni1.gr.home.nl [213.51.130.201]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 664372442B for ; Thu, 17 May 2007 11:25:38 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <20070517084847.550D91CE303@ws1-6.us4.outblaze.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org To: ramkromberg@mail.com Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On 05/17/2007 10:48 AM, ramkromberg@mail.com wrote: > Yes, its like you said Rene, sb8 works although the sound is distorted > and the module can't be removed... > Later I can modprobe sgalaxy too, and the sound works without a hitch. Okay, don't know what the trouble is with that distortion (if you haven't set the volumes to 100, that is) but not too important right now. > Also since now I can compile some code - your "eeprom.c" compiles and > works - I'm available for further testing... I might want you to test some mode-resetting code later; will be sure to ask if needed. > I also noticed that the binary you sent was 506kb while my compilation > is 9kb, maybe you sent an early/later version with some additional > includes for verbose ? > I compiled it with "gcc -W -Wall -o eeprom eeprom.c" like you said (on > my xubuntu 7.04 with build-essentials deb package installed). Now try it with "gcc -static -W -Wall -o eeprom eeprom.c". I compiled the binary I provided with that "-static" flag which means the program includes all library code directly inside the binary and doesn't link to the library code you already have on your system. I did this to avoid any version problems that may exist between different distributions. Essentially you're only guaranteed that a dynamic executable will work on the system on which it was compiled (rather, on a system with the same versions of the libraries installed as on the system on which it was compiled). In this case the program only links to the system C library and did nothing weird so it wasn't much of an issue, but I don't even want to deal with any _possible_ problems of that nature... Yes, with a normal (ie, dynamic) link that 9k is correct. Rene.