The Great Pulseaudio Mixer Debate: a modest (productive) proposal

Sat Apr 25 23:47:59 UTC 2009

On Sun, 2009-04-26 at 00:42 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Sat, 25.04.09 14:57, Callum Lerwick (seg at haxxed.com) wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 2009-04-25 at 03:38 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > > Juggling with numbers like this is pointless in Free Software. We
> > > have no clue about our end users.
> > 
> > We have plenty of clues about our end users. It's called "verbal
> > communication".
> 
> Ah, "verbal communication"? I see, that's what you call saying "Fuck
> you" to upstream.

Well, if you insist, let's take another look at that message:

https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2009-April/msg01773.html
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2009-April/msg01852.html

On Thu, 2009-04-23 at 01:31 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: 
> On Wed, 22.04.09 14:51, Callum Lerwick (seg at haxxed.com) wrote:
> 
> > > > > >  Can I at least get a secret gconf key to do what
> > > > > > I want? :P

This is the second time I politely ask for some direction as to achieve my goal.

> > > > > The volume control uses PulseAudio, it doesn't use ALSA directly
> > > > > anymore, so no, there's no secret GConf key for that.

Finally, a hint. What I want lies within the PulseAudio daemon itself. I
did not know that until I was told, just now.

> > > > So a PulseAudio config option then. Do I have to write the patch myself?

I continue attempting to get some direction a third time. I start
getting annoyed. I display my willingness to write a patch if necessary.

> > > Probably not a PA config option either.
> > > 
> > > The volume control applet will show a mixer for input devices if an
> > > application is recording on it. You'd just need to make the mixer think
> > > that something is recording on that device. I'm not sure how to do that,
> > > but Lennart might.
> > 
> > No, you are misunderstanding. I don't want to adjust the input volume. I
> > want it left alone. I want the master left alone. Master stays at 0dB,
> > Line stays at 0dB. I want PA to dink with PCM instead of Master.

Still annoyed, and apparently getting misunderstood. Which is annoying.

> You can pass a parameter (control=) when loading the PA ALSA plugin
> (module-alsa-sink) which specifies the ALSA mixer element to
> choose. It's intended to be used as a hackish work-around for drivers
> that don't name their controls properly.

Wow, finally, exactly the information I was looking for. I don't know
your codebase, Lennart. The polite thing to do is guide a fellow coder
through your codebase, that you know, and are familiar with, by
definition. I just wanted your help, Lennart.

... It doesn't work, but I guess the bridge to further guidance is
burned.

> > Let's just reverse that then:
> > 
> > --- pulseaudio-0.9.15/src/modules/alsa/alsa-util.c      2009-04-13 16:11:32.000000000 -0500
> > +++ pulseaudio-0.9.15.patched/src/modules/alsa/alsa-util.c      2009-04-22 14:23:49.367297597 -0500
> > @@ -1180,7 +1180,7 @@
> >              else if (profile)
> >                  e = pa_alsa_find_elem(m, profile->playback_control_name, profile->playback_control_fallback, TRUE);
> >              else
> > -                e = pa_alsa_find_elem(m, "Master", "PCM", TRUE);
> > +                e = pa_alsa_find_elem(m, "PCM", "Master", TRUE);
> >              break;
> >  
> >          case SND_PCM_STREAM_CAPTURE:

I ATTEMPTED A PATCH! SEE, IT'S RIGHT THERE!

> The mixer handling code changed a couple of times after this.

The patch fails, yes. Some further guidance would be nice. 

> > Suggestion: Make fallback order a config option. You are hardcoding
> > policy. That's a no-no.
> 
> No. This has nothing to do with policy.
> 
> We want to control the 'outermost' volume slider. Because that's the
> one that most likely controls the actual analog amplifier if there is
> any. Controlling 'PCM' is kind of pointless on most modern cards since
> it is implemented digitally.
> 
> It simply doesn't make any sense to pick 'PCM', unless the driver is a
> bit weird and doesn't have a 'Master' control.
> 
> And as mentioned there's a workaround, you can specify the control for
> a sink. But using that will break device autodetecting and hence the
> whole profile logic. BTW, that option was contributed by someone with a
> weird driver who supplied me with a patch. He didn't whine on a huge
> thread on a mailing list, but just prepared a patch. Could be a good
> role model for some other folks, don't you think?

And here it is. I already displayed a willingness to write a patch. I
*attempted* a patch. It's right there in the archives, signed with my
gpg key. It's right there in YOUR QUOTED MESSAGE, plain as day. Do you
read before you post? Do you possess *any* grip on reality?

And you DARE to suggest I'm just some lazy loudmouth making demands? Is
there any more succinct response to that level of dickery than "Fuck
you."? I sure can't think of one.

So seriously Lennart, Fuck you.

<clip>

End message.

> And no, we have no hard numbers about anything our end users want. I
> know your hubris and stuff but uh, sorry, in contrast to what you may
> believe I don't think that you are representative for the mythical end
> user of Fedora. You are just a very very vocal minority.

Yes, we get it. Any individual who speaks up is by definition a
minority. So there is absolutely no one you will listen to but yourself.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20090425/b9561856/attachment.sig>