[alsa-devel] ALSA Version change

William Pitcock nenolod at sacredspiral.co.uk
Tue Mar 11 19:36:09 CET 2008

On Tue, 2008-03-11 at 11:30 -0700, Chris Healy wrote:
> Currently, I am using a kernel with ALSA version 1.0.13.  This is
> on an i.MX31 ARM11 platform.  (This is what it came with.)  We want to use a
> codec that currently has and ASoC supported driver so it seems best that we
> move forward to a newer version of ALSA.  (1.0.14 or later has ASoC.)
> If we are going to the trouble of moving from 1.0.13 to a later version,
> does it make sense to port to 1.0.14 or 1.0.16?  It makes sense that moving
> to 1.0.14 would take the least effort, but obviously, 1.0.16 has bug fixes
> and features.  Do you think there is a large delta porting wise between
> moving to 1.0.16 instead of 1.0.14.  (The assumption is that we have to move
> over to the later alsa-lib and alsa-utils, correct?)
> The other question we have is in reference to the max number of cards we are
> working with.  This is an embedded system and we want to control 16 audio
> codecs, (cards).  We won't be using the PCM interfaces of these cards, but
> we do need to control the codecs through the mixer interface.  I have seen
> limitations previously alluding to a maximum of 8 cards but this was a few
> years ago.  Is this true with the most recent versions, and if so, any ideas
> on what is necessary to change this?
> Thanks,
> Chris

Usually ALSA's configure script will patch the kernel itself AFAIK, so
there's no need to worry about any unnecessary trouble. As for
versioning, 1.0.16 is what you probably want.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://mailman.alsa-project.org/pipermail/alsa-devel/attachments/20080311/991ef6ed/attachment.sig 

More information about the Alsa-devel mailing list