Re: Why pavucontrol is not installed by default?
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 08:19, Rahul Sundaram sunda...@fedoraproject.org wrote: On 12/17/2009 12:46 PM, Christof Damian wrote: On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 19:58, Lennart Poettering mzerq...@0pointer.de wrote: pavucontrol currently crashes (and pulseaudio) for me on one machine and I need this functionality. File a bug. Could everyone on this list please assume that I filed a bug or found the bug already reported if I mention a bug. Useful to add a reference to those bug reports in that case. The thing is that the thread wasn't about this bug and I wasn't complaining about the bug. I just wanted to know in which direction pulseaudio is going. I could as well have said: In the future there will be no pavucontrol, how will this be possible then. I just find it annoying that some people seem to have File a bug. in their signature, when one should assume that on fedora-devel everyone would file a bug for valid problems. It might and should be different on fedora or the forums. Christof -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why pavucontrol is not installed by default?
On 12/17/2009 03:20 PM, Christof Damian wrote: I just find it annoying that some people seem to have File a bug. in their signature, when one should assume that on fedora-devel everyone would file a bug for valid problems. It might and should be different on fedora or the forums. They do that because the assumption that everyone will have filed bugs would have been very wrong considering the past experiences. Rahul -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why pavucontrol is not installed by default?
On Wed, 09.12.09 13:51, Christof Damian (chris...@damian.net) wrote: On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 12:59, Tomasz Torcz to...@pipebreaker.pl wrote: On Tue, Dec 08, 2009 at 09:51:55AM -0200, Paulo Cavalcanti wrote: pavucontrol is regarded as advance tool, but also partly obsolete. Current gnome-volume-control superseded most of its functionality: controlling different streams volume, switching profile, outputs, fallback devices. I am curious: If pavucontrol is obsolete, is there some other tool to tell skype to use headsets, while rhythmbox uses the speakers? This is about the only feature still only available in pavucontrol, that we'd like to support in g-v-c as well. During GUADEC we discussed a few possible designs for this, so hopefully this will come soon. pavucontrol currently crashes (and pulseaudio) for me on one machine and I need this functionality. File a bug. Lennart -- Lennart PoetteringRed Hat, Inc. lennart [at] poettering [dot] net http://0pointer.net/lennart/ GnuPG 0x1A015CC4 -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why pavucontrol is not installed by default?
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 19:58, Lennart Poettering mzerq...@0pointer.de wrote: pavucontrol currently crashes (and pulseaudio) for me on one machine and I need this functionality. File a bug. Could everyone on this list please assume that I filed a bug or found the bug already reported if I mention a bug. Cheers, Christof -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why pavucontrol is not installed by default?
On 12/17/2009 12:46 PM, Christof Damian wrote: On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 19:58, Lennart Poettering mzerq...@0pointer.de wrote: pavucontrol currently crashes (and pulseaudio) for me on one machine and I need this functionality. File a bug. Could everyone on this list please assume that I filed a bug or found the bug already reported if I mention a bug. Useful to add a reference to those bug reports in that case. Rahul -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why pavucontrol is not installed by default?
Adam Williamson wrote: I actually dropped gst-mixer with F12, as we planned all along. So that one's not an option for F12. Someone could unorphan it, or use the F11 package. (BTW, I don't see why you retired it as it was clearly still useful to some users and it can't hurt to have it in the repository.) Kevin Kofler -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why pavucontrol is not installed by default?
On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 23:22 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: Adam Williamson wrote: I actually dropped gst-mixer with F12, as we planned all along. So that one's not an option for F12. Someone could unorphan it, or use the F11 package. (BTW, I don't see why you retired it as it was clearly still useful to some users and it can't hurt to have it in the repository.) Because I don't see a substantial enough need to keep maintaining it now gnome-volume-control has most of the features most users need. If someone wants to maintain it I'm happy to pass it off to them, though I'd now agree with Lennart and the desktop team that it should not be in the default installed package sets (comps) any more. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why pavucontrol is not installed by default?
On Tue, 2009-12-08 at 14:05 -0500, Jon Masters wrote: On Tue, 2009-12-08 at 12:59 +0100, Tomasz Torcz wrote: On Tue, Dec 08, 2009 at 09:51:55AM -0200, Paulo Cavalcanti wrote: I did a clean install of Fedora 12 and realized that pavucontrol was not installed by default. I have two sound cards and I only got sound when I manually installed pavucontrol and used it. Any reason? pavucontrol is regarded as advance tool, but also partly obsolete. Current gnome-volume-control superseded most of its functionality: controlling different streams volume, switching profile, outputs, fallback devices. The new gnome-volume-control is so cut-down it's not useful to me. In the quest to be more Mac-like in removing mixer controls (and not even having any obvious advanced mode), I now have a choice of no audio or having full volume LFE output *and* whatever mixer level I have set for the master output. alsamixer works fine, but then I can't use the volume sliders on my desktop and it gets rather awkward. pauvucontrol is no different in that respect. If gnome-volume-control / pavucontrol do not correctly control your volume, please file an appropriate bug report: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_debug_PulseAudio_problems Thanks. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why pavucontrol is not installed by default?
On Tue, 2009-12-08 at 21:45 +, Bastien Nocera wrote: You can still do all the heavy lifting you want. Install the old gst-mixer, I actually dropped gst-mixer with F12, as we planned all along. So that one's not an option for F12. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why pavucontrol is not installed by default?
On Wed, 2009-12-09 at 13:40 -0500, Jon Masters wrote: I couldn't disagree more strongly. As a Linux user, I want the show me everything option. I don't care if I have to check a box to do it, but I want to see all the knobs and dials. And I at least expect not to have what I'm doing with alsamixer interfered with by the other tools. It's quite difficult for any given mixer not to 'interfere' with any other, given that, in the end, they're all poking the same underlying dials. We're always going to provide alsamixer for anyone who needs access to all the controls, it's not going anywhere. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why pavucontrol is not installed by default?
On Wed, 2009-12-09 at 13:46 -0500, Jon Masters wrote: All paranoia and ranting aside, there is some truth to this. There is a definite trend in the Linux community to want to cater to the lowest common denominator by being more Mac/Windows-esque. I put up with it because I can usually ignore it (I refuse on principal to use a GUI to copy a file, for example, but that's just me being weird), but I don't see the harm in hiding the advanced stuff under a checkbox - the advanced mixer stuff is still there underneath after all. That kind of 'split' interface - with the advanced stuff 'hidden away' - has several significant problems. It's much more difficult to support when you have to consider the possibility of there being two different interfaces the user could be using to the program. It's also been quite solidly documented in usability studies that just about everyone tends to consider themselves an expert and hence hit the 'advanced' button, even when they don't actually have a freaking clue what they're doing. It also encourages lazy interface design - the designer can always think 'well, I'll just make this a checkbox under 'advanced' somewhere', rather than considering how to properly design a single configuration interface. There are probably still cases where it makes sense, but it's not an unproblematic design, and I'm not sure I'd agree it's a sensible model for the default volume control. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why pavucontrol is not installed by default?
On Fri, 2009-12-11 at 11:31 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: On Wed, 2009-12-09 at 13:46 -0500, Jon Masters wrote: All paranoia and ranting aside, there is some truth to this. There is a definite trend in the Linux community to want to cater to the lowest common denominator by being more Mac/Windows-esque. I put up with it because I can usually ignore it (I refuse on principal to use a GUI to copy a file, for example, but that's just me being weird), but I don't see the harm in hiding the advanced stuff under a checkbox - the advanced mixer stuff is still there underneath after all. That kind of 'split' interface - with the advanced stuff 'hidden away' - has several significant problems. It's much more difficult to support when you have to consider the possibility of there being two different interfaces the user could be using to the program. It's also been quite solidly documented in usability studies that just about everyone tends to consider themselves an expert and hence hit the 'advanced' button, even when they don't actually have a freaking clue what they're doing. It also encourages lazy interface design - the designer can always think 'well, I'll just make this a checkbox under 'advanced' somewhere', rather than considering how to properly design a single configuration interface. (or, also, how to properly design the underlying service that the UI is supposed to configure) Example: openvpn. It has literally 500 configuration options that must be set exactly the same on both the server and the client. It is too dumb to automatically negotiate options and thus keep the client configuration simple. Thus the hapless user is required to know that the TLS Auth Direction must be 1 on the the client because it is 0 on the server. Which requires the sysadmin to publish the server's configuration somewhere. Yay. One could make the same general complaint about ALSA. Dan -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why pavucontrol is not installed by default?
Le vendredi 11 décembre 2009 à 11:31 -0800, Adam Williamson a écrit : It also encourages lazy interface design - the designer can always think 'well, I'll just make this a checkbox under 'advanced' somewhere', rather than considering how to properly design a single configuration interface. I fail to see how it is worse than designers that think this is advanced stuff, I don't need to handle it and then redefine advanced users as people able to use bugzilla and contradict me At least in the fist lazy design variant the features are available somewhere. -- Nicolas Mailhot signature.asc Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why pavucontrol is not installed by default?
On Wed, 2009-12-09 at 13:51 +0100, Christof Damian wrote: On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 12:59, Tomasz Torcz to...@pipebreaker.pl wrote: On Tue, Dec 08, 2009 at 09:51:55AM -0200, Paulo Cavalcanti wrote: pavucontrol is regarded as advance tool, but also partly obsolete. Current gnome-volume-control superseded most of its functionality: controlling different streams volume, switching profile, outputs, fallback devices. I am curious: If pavucontrol is obsolete, is there some other tool to tell skype to use headsets, while rhythmbox uses the speakers? It's not obsolete, it's just not installed by default. pavucontrol currently crashes (and pulseaudio) for me on one machine and I need this functionality. File bugs! -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why pavucontrol is not installed by default?
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 15:14, Bastien Nocera bnoc...@redhat.com wrote: I am curious: If pavucontrol is obsolete, is there some other tool to tell skype to use headsets, while rhythmbox uses the speakers? It's not obsolete, it's just not installed by default. pavucontrol currently crashes (and pulseaudio) for me on one machine and I need this functionality. File bugs! I do, but this one is already in bugzilla as far as I can see. I just wanted to mention why I am looking for an alternative. Christof -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why pavucontrol is not installed by default?
On Tue, 2009-12-08 at 21:45 +, Bastien Nocera wrote: On Tue, 2009-12-08 at 14:05 -0500, Jon Masters wrote: The new gnome-volume-control is so cut-down it's not useful to me. In the quest to be more Mac-like in removing mixer controls No, it's in a quest of providing *solutions* to user's problems, and not blindly showing everything the software and the hardware can do. I couldn't disagree more strongly. As a Linux user, I want the show me everything option. I don't care if I have to check a box to do it, but I want to see all the knobs and dials. And I at least expect not to have what I'm doing with alsamixer interfered with by the other tools. Jon. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why pavucontrol is not installed by default?
On Wed, 2009-12-09 at 02:44 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote: On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Jon Masters wrote: The new gnome-volume-control is so cut-down it's not useful to me. In the quest to be more Mac-like in removing mixer controls (and not even having any obvious advanced mode), I now have a choice of no audio or having full volume LFE output *and* whatever mixer level I have set for the master output. alsamixer works fine, but then I can't use the volume sliders on my desktop and it gets rather awkward. Sadly, they consider this bug as an enhancement. I have had friends who had the same hardware with me but they were using another OS. I remember them being jealous because I had so much more control over same sound card. It made me proud at the time. I fear that this disease of oversimplifying will make us forget why we are using Linux. All paranoia and ranting aside, there is some truth to this. There is a definite trend in the Linux community to want to cater to the lowest common denominator by being more Mac/Windows-esque. I put up with it because I can usually ignore it (I refuse on principal to use a GUI to copy a file, for example, but that's just me being weird), but I don't see the harm in hiding the advanced stuff under a checkbox - the advanced mixer stuff is still there underneath after all. Jon. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Why pavucontrol is not installed by default?
I did a clean install of Fedora 12 and realized that pavucontrol was not installed by default. I have two sound cards and I only got sound when I manually installed pavucontrol and used it. Any reason? Thanks. -- Paulo Roma Cavalcanti LCG - UFRJ -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why pavucontrol is not installed by default?
On Tue, Dec 08, 2009 at 09:51:55AM -0200, Paulo Cavalcanti wrote: I did a clean install of Fedora 12 and realized that pavucontrol was not installed by default. I have two sound cards and I only got sound when I manually installed pavucontrol and used it. Any reason? pavucontrol is regarded as advance tool, but also partly obsolete. Current gnome-volume-control superseded most of its functionality: controlling different streams volume, switching profile, outputs, fallback devices. -- Tomasz TorczFuneral in the morning, IDE hacking xmpp: zdzich...@chrome.plin the afternoon and evening. - Alan Cox -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why pavucontrol is not installed by default?
On Tue, 2009-12-08 at 12:59 +0100, Tomasz Torcz wrote: On Tue, Dec 08, 2009 at 09:51:55AM -0200, Paulo Cavalcanti wrote: I did a clean install of Fedora 12 and realized that pavucontrol was not installed by default. I have two sound cards and I only got sound when I manually installed pavucontrol and used it. Any reason? pavucontrol is regarded as advance tool, but also partly obsolete. Current gnome-volume-control superseded most of its functionality: controlling different streams volume, switching profile, outputs, fallback devices. The new gnome-volume-control is so cut-down it's not useful to me. In the quest to be more Mac-like in removing mixer controls (and not even having any obvious advanced mode), I now have a choice of no audio or having full volume LFE output *and* whatever mixer level I have set for the master output. alsamixer works fine, but then I can't use the volume sliders on my desktop and it gets rather awkward. I still pine for the days of isapnpdump when I had to do all the heavy lifting by hand, but it worked 100% of the time. Jon. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why pavucontrol is not installed by default?
On Tue, 2009-12-08 at 14:05 -0500, Jon Masters wrote: On Tue, 2009-12-08 at 12:59 +0100, Tomasz Torcz wrote: On Tue, Dec 08, 2009 at 09:51:55AM -0200, Paulo Cavalcanti wrote: I did a clean install of Fedora 12 and realized that pavucontrol was not installed by default. I have two sound cards and I only got sound when I manually installed pavucontrol and used it. Any reason? pavucontrol is regarded as advance tool, but also partly obsolete. Current gnome-volume-control superseded most of its functionality: controlling different streams volume, switching profile, outputs, fallback devices. The new gnome-volume-control is so cut-down it's not useful to me. In the quest to be more Mac-like in removing mixer controls No, it's in a quest of providing *solutions* to user's problems, and not blindly showing everything the software and the hardware can do. (and not even having any obvious advanced mode), I now have a choice of no audio or having full volume LFE output *and* whatever mixer level I have set for the master output. The sub-woofer setting works fine here, what's the problem? alsamixer works fine, but then I can't use the volume sliders on my desktop and it gets rather awkward. I still pine for the days of isapnpdump when I had to do all the heavy lifting by hand, but it worked 100% of the time. You can still do all the heavy lifting you want. Install the old gst-mixer, or whatever GUI alsa mixer, just don't expect it to integrate with the desktop. Cheers -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why pavucontrol is not installed by default?
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Jon Masters wrote: The new gnome-volume-control is so cut-down it's not useful to me. In the quest to be more Mac-like in removing mixer controls (and not even having any obvious advanced mode), I now have a choice of no audio or having full volume LFE output *and* whatever mixer level I have set for the master output. alsamixer works fine, but then I can't use the volume sliders on my desktop and it gets rather awkward. Sadly, they consider this bug as an enhancement. I have had friends who had the same hardware with me but they were using another OS. I remember them being jealous because I had so much more control over same sound card. It made me proud at the time. I fear that this disease of oversimplifying will make us forget why we are using Linux. Try kmix, it always works. You can probably put in on Gnome panel too. Orcan -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
