Mike Kazantsev <mk.frag...@gmail.com> writes: > On Sat, 23 Mar 2024 23:25:24 +0200 > Björn Bidar <bjorn.bi...@thaodan.de> wrote: > >> Should pactl be used here in the first place and not e.g. the dbus >> interface? > > module-dbus-protocol is not in default pulseaudio configuration afaik > (though maybe some distros put it there), and used to give experimental > and deprecation warnings before removal, so might not be a good idea to > rely on even in pulseaudio. >
Oh I wasn't aware of that, I assume pactl will in the end just talk to pulseaudio over dbus. Previously I've worked with Pulseaudio over said interface. > Also, libpulse protocol and "pactl" should work with pipewire (which > tends to replace pulseaudio in distributions), but don't think it has > same dbus interface. > > Using libpulse through some kind of FFI might be an option, but can't > imagine it being worth the effort over using pactl for occasional > volume adjustments. Yeah kinda sounds like an overkill. Just parsing commandline tools that are not supposed to be used as IPC is always fragile. Maybe a general API in Emacs would be good too.
