On 09/23/2015 12:25 PM, kendell clark wrote:
hi
I use thunderbird. I generally press control+shift+r to reply to all,
including the list. There is a reply to list option, but all it seems to
do is forward, so I'm not sure how. I'll investigate today since I've
got some time on my hands.
I use T
hi
I use thunderbird. I generally press control+shift+r to reply to all,
including the list. There is a reply to list option, but all it seems to
do is forward, so I'm not sure how. I'll investigate today since I've
got some time on my hands.
Thanks
Kendell clark
On 09/23/2015 10:41 AM, Jonathan
On 23/09/15 00:09 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 22.09.2015 um 23:58 schrieb kendell clark:
but I'm certainly not going to insist on it. I also need to
figure out how to just reply to the list, rather than to the person who
sent the message as well as the list
get a mail-client which supports
On Tue, 2015-09-22 at 16:58 -0500, kendell clark wrote:
> hi
> Oops? My apologies. I didn't mean to accuse anyone in particular of
> causing my problem. It makes it easier if someone either top or bottom
> posts, but I'm certainly not going to insist on it. I also need to
> figure out how to just r
Am 22.09.2015 um 23:58 schrieb kendell clark:
Oops? My apologies. I didn't mean to accuse anyone in particular of
causing my problem. It makes it easier if someone either top or bottom
posts
no it does not, nobody needs the whole thread in each message
see my reponse - the context is very cle
hi
Oops? My apologies. I didn't mean to accuse anyone in particular of
causing my problem. It makes it easier if someone either top or bottom
posts, but I'm certainly not going to insist on it. I also need to
figure out how to just reply to the list, rather than to the person who
sent the message a
On Tue, 2015-09-22 at 16:31 -0500, kendell clark wrote:
> hi
> Just a polite request. I'm having trouble following the thread because
> there are so many intermingled responses, with different bits of it
> quoted and commented on. Would everyone mind putting their responses
> either on the top or t
hi
Just a polite request. I'm having trouble following the thread because
there are so many intermingled responses, with different bits of it
quoted and commented on. Would everyone mind putting their responses
either on the top or the bottom of the message? Top would be better for
me, but I also d
hi
If this is true, then why have I had no luck getting PA developers to do
anything? Not to complain, but I've been on their irc channel several
time. If I get a response at all, it's to shrug and tell me to bug
whatever app it is that's misbehaving. This is all well and good if the
app is both fr
On Tue, 2015-09-22 at 09:56 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-09-22 at 15:51 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > On Thu, 17.09.15 20:59, Germano Massullo (germano.massu...@gmail.com)
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Today I had a scary experience with the audio of my computer.
> > > I was listenin
On Tue, 2015-09-22 at 15:51 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Thu, 17.09.15 20:59, Germano Massullo (germano.massu...@gmail.com)
> wrote:
>
> > Today I had a scary experience with the audio of my computer.
> > I was listening to music with Amarok, using my headphones... The
> > KMix
> > volume
Il 22/09/2015 03:43, Rex Dieter ha scritto:
> Germano Massullo wrote:
>
>> Il 21/09/2015 21:45, Thomas Daede ha scritto:
>>> Is there currently a bug open for this? I'd rather it not get lost.
>> I think that a FESCo ticket would be more appropriate.
> I think it would be premature to appeal to FES
On Thu, 17.09.15 20:59, Germano Massullo (germano.massu...@gmail.com) wrote:
> Today I had a scary experience with the audio of my computer.
> I was listening to music with Amarok, using my headphones... The KMix
> volume level was ~ 35%. When I logged into a video conference
> application, the vo
On Tue, 2015-09-22 at 05:31 -0500, kendell clark wrote:
> hi
> I'm ambivolent on the subject. If flat volumes become a problem, I
> know
> how to turn them off. However, I think because of all the complaints
> here by people who have a very good track record and don't complain
> often, this seems t
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 12:00 AM, Owen Taylor wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-09-17 at 23:26 +0200, Germano Massullo wrote:
>> Il 17/09/2015 21:13, Andrew Lutomirski ha scritto:
>> >
>> > To clarify: did you get blasted by music or by video conference
>> > sounds? If the music volume got louder, then it so
hi
I'm ambivolent on the subject. If flat volumes become a problem, I know
how to turn them off. However, I think because of all the complaints
here by people who have a very good track record and don't complain
often, this seems to bear out what I've been trying to say. That this
should be fixed i
- Original Message -
> On Mon, 2015-09-21 at 18:00 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote:
> > There is danger to the ears if an application assumes that 100%
> > volume
> > is a safe volume and blindly sets its volume to 100% without user
> > input. But that only affects that application - one applica
Dne 22.9.2015 v 00:00 Owen Taylor napsal(a):
> On Thu, 2015-09-17 at 23:26 +0200, Germano Massullo wrote:
>> Il 17/09/2015 21:13, Andrew Lutomirski ha scritto:
>>> To clarify: did you get blasted by music or by video conference
>>> sounds? If the music volume got louder, then it sounds like either
Thomas Daede wrote:
> Um, that bug looks totally unrelated to the problems reported here.
It was referenced in the first post of this thread. :)
-- Rex
> On 09/21/2015 06:51 PM, Rex Dieter wrote:
>> Rex Dieter wrote:
>>
>>> Germano Massullo wrote:
>>>
Il 21/09/2015 21:45, Thomas Daede ha
hi
Not to go off topic, but I keep hearing comparisons between linux and
windows in this regard. I haven't used windows in ages, but how does
windows avoid this problem, or does it? Maybe we could do something
similar to what they do? I still say pulse audio needs to fix this, and
keep it fixed. It
On Mon, 2015-09-21 at 17:46 -0700, Thomas Daede wrote:
> In the case of Youtube, you shouldn't be having any issues because
> Mozilla switched to using a soft mixer internal to Firefox:
>
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1046814
>
> If you still have issues, you should report them u
Um, that bug looks totally unrelated to the problems reported here.
On 09/21/2015 06:51 PM, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Rex Dieter wrote:
>
>> Germano Massullo wrote:
>>
>>> Il 21/09/2015 21:45, Thomas Daede ha scritto:
Is there currently a bug open for this? I'd rather it not get lost.
>>> I think
Rex Dieter wrote:
> Germano Massullo wrote:
>
>> Il 21/09/2015 21:45, Thomas Daede ha scritto:
>>> Is there currently a bug open for this? I'd rather it not get lost.
>> I think that a FESCo ticket would be more appropriate.
>
> I think it would be premature to appeal to FESCo without giving pul
Germano Massullo wrote:
> Il 21/09/2015 21:45, Thomas Daede ha scritto:
>> Is there currently a bug open for this? I'd rather it not get lost.
> I think that a FESCo ticket would be more appropriate.
I think it would be premature to appeal to FESCo without giving pulseaudio
maintainers a chance
In the case of Youtube, you shouldn't be having any issues because
Mozilla switched to using a soft mixer internal to Firefox:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1046814
If you still have issues, you should report them upstream.
(note that this means all website volume sliders are desi
On Mon, 2015-09-21 at 18:00 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote:
> There is danger to the ears if an application assumes that 100%
> volume
> is a safe volume and blindly sets its volume to 100% without user
> input. But that only affects that application - one application's
> misbehavior never affects anothe
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Owen Taylor wrote:
Experimenting with GNOME, the model presented to the user seems to be:
- Each application's volume control separate goes from 0-100% of the
maximum system volume.
- Adjusting each application is independent
- Modifying the system global volume slid
hi
I don't know, but if there's not, I'll go file one and post the link here.
Thanks
Kendell clark
On 09/21/2015 02:45 PM, Thomas Daede wrote:
> Is there currently a bug open for this? I'd rather it not get lost.
>
> On 09/17/2015 11:59 AM, Germano Massullo wrote:
>> ===
>> Definition of fla
OK, here's a couple of counterexamples, still using default apps:
- I start chatting on Firefox with WebRTC and I can't hear the person
talking over my music. So I open the GNOME control center and make
Firefox louder. Pulseaudio is awesome. But now, the volume of all of my
other applications is p
On Thu, 2015-09-17 at 23:26 +0200, Germano Massullo wrote:
> Il 17/09/2015 21:13, Andrew Lutomirski ha scritto:
> >
> > To clarify: did you get blasted by music or by video conference
> > sounds? If the music volume got louder, then it sounds like either
> > a
> > straight-up bug in PulseAudio (a
Il 21/09/2015 21:45, Thomas Daede ha scritto:
> Is there currently a bug open for this? I'd rather it not get lost.
I think that a FESCo ticket would be more appropriate.
I will open it during next days.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/l
Is there currently a bug open for this? I'd rather it not get lost.
On 09/17/2015 11:59 AM, Germano Massullo wrote:
> ===
> Definition of flat-volumes from [1] : it scales the device-volume with
> the volume of the "loudest" application. For example, raising the VoIP
> call volume will raise t
hi
Yup, I've seen all these use cases. TBH, this really should be handled
in pulse audio. IE this isn't so much a problem of gnome, although I do
agree taht they should make app volumes easier to set, as it is a pulse
audio problem. Pulse audio should be smart enough to handle such use
cases and ad
> Today I had a scary experience with the audio of my computer.
> I was listening to music with Amarok, using my headphones... The KMix volume
> level was ~ 35%. When I logged into a video conference application, the
> volume suddenly reached the 100%. I was shocked, having the maximum audio
> leve
On Thu, 17 Sep, 2015 at 18:59:19 GMT, Germano Massullo wrote:
> To avoid that, you have to set
> flat-volumes =3D no
> in /etc/pulse/daemon.conf
You may also set this in ~/.config/pulse/daemon.conf.
--Ben
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailma
hi
I'll second michael. Although I'll add that this should probably be a
temporary measure. This really should be addressed by pulseaudio
upstream, so that flat volumes can still be used, even with misbehaving
applications. There's currently zero documentation on what causes this,
whic means for me
On Thu, 2015-09-17 at 15:33 -0700, Thomas Daede wrote:
> That said, flat-volume is the upstream default so we might want their
> input, as well as looking at what other distros do.
Ubuntu disables it. To the best of my knowledge, all other distros
stick with the upstream default.
I am in favor of
hi
The only negative issue, although to me it's more of an oh, that's right
moment, is that you can no longer adjust application volumes up beyond
the master volume, only down, but that's kind of the idea. I do suggest,
and I don't know how easy this would be to do, that sound application
settings,
hi
I can second this. Currently we do this in sonar on versions after
2015.3, which have to be built atm. There are two applications off the
top of my head I know of that will currently do this. They are, kodi
media center, and qemu virtualization software, if you emulate a sound
card of anything o
I also absolutely hate flat-volumes. Often I have trouble getting an
application loud enough, and discover that it's too low in the mixer.
The idea of flat volumes is to avoid a global volume, but the way it
interacts is super confusing and unlike any other system people use
(except maybe Android,
On 09/17/2015 01:59 PM, Germano Massullo wrote:
> I found many users stories complaining about this default setting [2] [3] [4]
> and you can easily find other by searching "pulseaudio flat volumes".
> I completely agree with user gaggra comment at [3]
>
> < misbehaving software can /physically h
Il 17/09/2015 21:13, Andrew Lutomirski ha scritto:
>
> To clarify: did you get blasted by music or by video conference
> sounds? If the music volume got louder, then it sounds like either a
> straight-up bug in PulseAudio (and a severe and dangerous one at that)
> or a serious bug in your video co
On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Germano Massullo
wrote:
>
> Today I had a scary experience with the audio of my computer.
> I was listening to music with Amarok, using my headphones... The KMix volume
> level was ~ 35%. When I logged into a video conference application, the
> volume suddenly rea
===
Definition of flat-volumes from [1] : it scales the device-volume with
the volume of the "loudest" application. For example, raising the VoIP
call volume will raise the hardware volume and adjust the music-player
volume so it stays where it was, without having to lower the volume of
the mus
44 matches
Mail list logo