[2.6.22 patch] the scheduled removal of OBSOLETE_OSS options

[2.6.22 patch] the scheduled removal of OBSOLETE_OSS options

[Adrian Bunk]

This patch contains the scheduled removal of the OBSOLETE_OSS options 
for 2.6.22.

Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>

---

 sound/oss/Kconfig          |   27 ---------------------------
 sound/oss/dmasound/Kconfig |   14 --------------
 2 files changed, 41 deletions(-)

--- linux-2.6.21-rc2-mm1/sound/oss/Kconfig.old	2007-03-05 01:22:21.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-2.6.21-rc2-mm1/sound/oss/Kconfig	2007-03-05 01:22:36.000000000 +0100
@@ -5,20 +5,6 @@
 #
 # Prompt user for primary drivers.
 
-config OBSOLETE_OSS
-	bool "Obsolete OSS drivers"
-	depends on SOUND_PRIME
-	help
-	  This option enables support for obsolete OSS drivers that
-	  are scheduled for removal in the near future since there
-	  are ALSA drivers for the same hardware.
-
-	  Please contact Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de> if you had to
-	  say Y here because your soundcard is not properly supported
-	  by ALSA.
-
-	  If unsure, say N.
-
 config SOUND_BT878
 	tristate "BT878 audio dma"
 	depends on SOUND_PRIME && PCI
@@ -45,19 +31,6 @@
 	  note that CONFIG_KGDB should not be enabled at the same
 	  time, since it also attempts to use this UART port.
 
-config SOUND_ES1371
-	tristate "Creative Ensoniq AudioPCI 97 (ES1371)"
-	depends on SOUND_PRIME && PCI && OBSOLETE_OSS
-	help
-	  Say Y or M if you have a PCI sound card utilizing the Ensoniq
-	  ES1371 chipset, such as Ensoniq's AudioPCI97. To find out if
-	  your sound card uses an ES1371 without removing your computer's
-	  cover, use lspci -n and look for the PCI ID 1274:1371. Since
-	  Ensoniq was bought by Creative Labs, Sound Blaster 64/PCI
-	  models are either ES1370 or ES1371 based. This driver differs
-	  slightly from OSS/Free, so PLEASE READ
-	  <file:Documentation/sound/oss/es1371>.
-
 config SOUND_ICH
 	tristate "Intel ICH (i8xx) audio support"
 	depends on SOUND_PRIME && PCI
--- linux-2.6.21-rc2-mm1/sound/oss/dmasound/Kconfig.old	2007-03-05 01:22:44.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-2.6.21-rc2-mm1/sound/oss/dmasound/Kconfig	2007-03-05 01:22:56.000000000 +0100
@@ -12,20 +12,6 @@
 	  want). If you want to compile it as a module, say M here and read
 	  <file:Documentation/kbuild/modules.txt>.
 
-config DMASOUND_PMAC
-	tristate "PowerMac DMA sound support"
-	depends on PPC32 && PPC_PMAC && SOUND && I2C && OBSOLETE_OSS
- 	select DMASOUND
-	help
-	  If you want to use the internal audio of your PowerMac in Linux,
-	  answer Y to this question. This will provide a Sun-like /dev/audio,
-	  compatible with the Linux/i386 sound system. Otherwise, say N.
-
-	  This driver is also available as a module ( = code which can be
-	  inserted in and removed from the running kernel whenever you
-	  want). If you want to compile it as a module, say M here and read
-	  <file:Documentation/kbuild/modules.txt>.
-
 config DMASOUND_PAULA
 	tristate "Amiga DMA sound support"
 	depends on (AMIGA || APUS) && SOUND

Re: [2.6.22 patch] the scheduled removal of OBSOLETE_OSS options

[Bill Davidsen]

Adrian Bunk wrote:
> This patch contains the scheduled removal of the OBSOLETE_OSS options 
> for 2.6.22.
> 
If these are drivers for which there are thought to be useful ALSA 
drivers, would it be reasonable to leave a stub for a help file naming 
the driver which claims to support the hardware?

I'm not objection to the removal of the drivers, just noting that 
identifying the new drivers can be made easier.

-- 
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
   "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked."  - from Slashdot

Re: [2.6.22 patch] the scheduled removal of OBSOLETE_OSS options

[Adrian Bunk]

On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 12:46:22PM -0500, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> Adrian Bunk wrote:
> >This patch contains the scheduled removal of the OBSOLETE_OSS options 
> >for 2.6.22.
> >
> If these are drivers for which there are thought to be useful ALSA 
> drivers, would it be reasonable to leave a stub for a help file naming 
> the driver which claims to support the hardware?
> 
> I'm not objection to the removal of the drivers, just noting that 
> identifying the new drivers can be made easier.

People compiling their own kernels aren't completely dumb - if you know 
about people having problems finding the right ALSA driver for their 
hardware, please name the concrete problems so that we can improve the 
description and/or help text of these ALSA options.

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

Re: [2.6.22 patch] the scheduled removal of OBSOLETE_OSS options

[Bill Davidsen]

Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 12:46:22PM -0500, Bill Davidsen wrote:
>   
>> Adrian Bunk wrote:
>>     
>>> This patch contains the scheduled removal of the OBSOLETE_OSS options 
>>> for 2.6.22.
>>>
>>>       
>> If these are drivers for which there are thought to be useful ALSA 
>> drivers, would it be reasonable to leave a stub for a help file naming 
>> the driver which claims to support the hardware?
>>
>> I'm not objection to the removal of the drivers, just noting that 
>> identifying the new drivers can be made easier.
>>     
>
> People compiling their own kernels aren't completely dumb - if you know 
> about people having problems finding the right ALSA driver for their 
> hardware, please name the concrete problems so that we can improve the 
> description and/or help text of these ALSA options.
>   
I'm not sure how my original note might have been clearer, but let me 
try again.

You are about to delete a number of OSS drivers because there are ALSA 
drivers for the hardware. I am assuming that for each of there drivers 
you have some ALSA driver in mind, rather than just just general 
handwaving. I therefore suggest that it would be good if one person, 
that would be you, could do a little Kconfig magic so that when 'make 
oldconfig' on new kernel source fails to support sound, there might be a 
message in the output with a hint, like 'OSS driver XXXX has been 
deleted and ALSA driver YYYY should support this hardware.' So one 
person who I bet knows which replacement drivers are most likely could 
save some effort for many people who otherwise may have to read help on 
a number of drivers (naming is not always obvious), or grep through the 
driver source for board or chipset names giving a clue.

If Kconfig can't do this, fine, I haven't studied it in years, nor ever 
been an expert. If you have no idea what drivers replace the ones you 
are deleting and are only following orders, fine too (but I doubt that). 
But no improvement to ALSA help text would save as many people as much 
time as a one line message telling them the most likely driver to 
support similar hardware and avoiding the need to look at that text, or 
at least let the cautious look as the most likely text first.

Since you are the agent of change in breaking many existing configs I 
thought you might be inclined to at least give a clue if it were small 
effort on your part.

-- 
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
  CTO TMR Associates, Inc
  Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979

Re: [2.6.22 patch] the scheduled removal of OBSOLETE_OSS options

[Willy Tarreau]

On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 06:55:04PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 12:46:22PM -0500, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> > Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > >This patch contains the scheduled removal of the OBSOLETE_OSS options 
> > >for 2.6.22.
> > >
> > If these are drivers for which there are thought to be useful ALSA 
> > drivers, would it be reasonable to leave a stub for a help file naming 
> > the driver which claims to support the hardware?
> > 
> > I'm not objection to the removal of the drivers, just noting that 
> > identifying the new drivers can be made easier.
> 
> People compiling their own kernels aren't completely dumb - if you know 
> about people having problems finding the right ALSA driver for their 
> hardware, please name the concrete problems so that we can improve the 
> description and/or help text of these ALSA options.

Real problem is that we can expect several "sound does not work anymore"
because people doing "make oldconfig" will get no warning at all about
the removed options. Remember people complaining about keyboard not working ?
Perhaps the real problem is more Kconfig than OSS, but it would be fine if
we found a solution to enumerate the list of options which have been removed
when they do their make oldconfig.

Regards,
Willy

Re: [2.6.22 patch] the scheduled removal of OBSOLETE_OSS options

[Adrian Bunk]

On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 07:21:57AM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 06:55:04PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 12:46:22PM -0500, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> > > Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > >This patch contains the scheduled removal of the OBSOLETE_OSS options 
> > > >for 2.6.22.
> > > >
> > > If these are drivers for which there are thought to be useful ALSA 
> > > drivers, would it be reasonable to leave a stub for a help file naming 
> > > the driver which claims to support the hardware?
> > > 
> > > I'm not objection to the removal of the drivers, just noting that 
> > > identifying the new drivers can be made easier.
> > 
> > People compiling their own kernels aren't completely dumb - if you know 
> > about people having problems finding the right ALSA driver for their 
> > hardware, please name the concrete problems so that we can improve the 
> > description and/or help text of these ALSA options.
> 
> Real problem is that we can expect several "sound does not work anymore"
> because people doing "make oldconfig" will get no warning at all about
> the removed options. Remember people complaining about keyboard not working ?

There already were two kernel releases where people had to say
explicitely "yes" to "Obsolete OSS drivers" with a quite clear help text
for getting these OSS drivers.

And did you complain when all the SATA options were renamed in 2.6.19
without any warnings in previous kernels and far more user-visible 
effects than some obsolete OSS drivers (and no driver for your hard 
disk even prevents booting)?

Or about the mess with the mes with the netfilter options when upgrading 
from 2.6.19 to 2.6.20?

If you didn't, this is the wrong patch to start complaining about...

> Perhaps the real problem is more Kconfig than OSS, but it would be fine if
> we found a solution to enumerate the list of options which have been removed
> when they do their make oldconfig.

Printing won't help - there are two many options (some even not user 
visible) that disappear with each kernel release.

> Regards,
> Willy

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

Re: [2.6.22 patch] the scheduled removal of OBSOLETE_OSS options

[Willy Tarreau]

Hi Adrian !

On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 08:56:02PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
(...)
> > Real problem is that we can expect several "sound does not work anymore"
> > because people doing "make oldconfig" will get no warning at all about
> > the removed options. Remember people complaining about keyboard not working ?
> 
> There already were two kernel releases where people had to say
> explicitely "yes" to "Obsolete OSS drivers" with a quite clear help text
> for getting these OSS drivers.

To be fair, I did not notice it, but I think that people who will miss it
will have skipped 2 versions, in which case they can reasonably expect
enough changes to be very careful when updating their config.

> And did you complain when all the SATA options were renamed in 2.6.19
> without any warnings in previous kernels and far more user-visible 
> effects than some obsolete OSS drivers (and no driver for your hard 
> disk even prevents booting)?

No, because I have no SATA disk ;-)

> Or about the mess with the mes with the netfilter options when upgrading 
> from 2.6.19 to 2.6.20?

Yes I've noticed this one, and at least it was clearly visible !

> If you didn't, this is the wrong patch to start complaining about...

Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining. I just realized from previous
post that options disappearing produce no warning on make oldconfig, and
that it is easy to get trapped, even though there's nothing harmful.

> > Perhaps the real problem is more Kconfig than OSS, but it would be fine if
> > we found a solution to enumerate the list of options which have been removed
> > when they do their make oldconfig.
> 
> Printing won't help - there are two many options (some even not user 
> visible) that disappear with each kernel release.

Sometimes I do a diff between old and new config, and I do not notice
that many changes. So maybe a simple report at the end saying "The
following options have been removed" may catch people's attention
when it lists something which looks like a driver they know they use.

Anyway, I don't have time to propose something in this area, and I
know that talking is cheap, showing the code is another matter.

Cheers,
Willy

Re: [2.6.22 patch] the scheduled removal of OBSOLETE_OSS options

[Lee Revell]

On 3/7/07, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> wrote:
> Real problem is that we can expect several "sound does not work anymore"
> because people doing "make oldconfig" will get no warning at all about
> the removed options. Remember people complaining about keyboard not working ?
> Perhaps the real problem is more Kconfig than OSS, but it would be fine if
> we found a solution to enumerate the list of options which have been removed
> when they do their make oldconfig.

I doubt there are that many users of the old OSS drivers.  Even
proprietary apps like Flash and Skype require ALSA these days.

Lee