orca sound problem

Hello, The volume on the orca login screen is very low and does not increase. Please check this. -- ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://

Latest wireplumber breaks sound in rawhide, downgrading to previous version fixes sound

Hi, The latest update to wireplumber, Name: wireplumber Version : 0.4.8 Release : 2.fc37 Architecture: x86_64 breaks sound in rawhide. I downloaded the src.rpm of the previous version which was only available in fc36, built it locally, and downgraded, and sound began working

Re: pipewire in rawhide isn't working for me, no sound. Any pulseaudio / pipewire migration links welcome.

sion with: >>systemctl --user enable pipewire-media-session >>systemctl --user start pipewire-media-session >>I believe there is an update to the default policy on f35 >>scheduled. maybe >>it does not apply automatically for >>already installed components, I

Re: pipewire in rawhide isn't working for me, no sound. Any pulseaudio / pipewire migration links welcome.

How to trouble shoot? I tested the following kernels with fully updated F35 and Gnome-Settings->Sound shown no sound devices: vmlinuz-5.12.0-198.fc35.x86_64 vmlinuz-5.13.0-0.rc6.20210617git70585216fe77.48.fc35.x86_64 vmlinuz-5.13.0-58.fc35.x86_64+debug vmlinuz-5.14.

Re: pipewire in rawhide isn't working for me, no sound. Any pulseaudio / pipewire migration links welcome.

Hello Stan, I would say that switching to PulseAudio from PipeWire on F35 is an ugly hack that you should try to avoid as much as possible. On Fedora 34, PulseAudio was replaced by PipeWire which is the default sound solution for Fedora 34. This is the same for Fedora 35. If you are having

Re: pipewire in rawhide isn't working for me, no sound. Any pulseaudio / pipewire migration links welcome.

On Sun, 4 Jul 2021 07:38:08 -0700 stan via test wrote: > As a test, I removed pipewire, and its dozen or so dependencies. > Sound started working again, and I was able to configure things to my > preferences. I'll keep an eye on pipewire and its progress, perhaps > try inst

Re: pipewire in rawhide isn't working for me, no sound. Any pulseaudio / pipewire migration links welcome.

takes with it, then run the above procedure, and reinstall all the > removed packages. I'm reluctant to do that, because those packages > will probably pull in pulseaudio again, recreating the problem. I'll > keep looking for other solutions for a while. As a test, I removed pipew

Re: pipewire in rawhide isn't working for me, no sound. Any pulseaudio / pipewire migration links welcome.

On Fri, 2 Jul 2021 16:48:26 -0700 stan via test wrote: > On Fri, 02 Jul 2021 14:36:32 -0700 > Adam Williamson wrote: > > What version of pipewire did you get? pipewire-0.3.31-1.fc35 is > > known broken. If you got that, get pipewire-0.3.31-2.fc35 instead - > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/ko

Re: pipewire in rawhide isn't working for me, no sound. Any pulseaudio / pipewire migration links welcome.

On Fri, 02 Jul 2021 14:36:32 -0700 Adam Williamson wrote: > On Fri, 2021-07-02 at 11:35 -0700, stan via test wrote: > > I am having trouble with sound in a new rawhide installation. I > > waited for F35 because I thought the kinks in pipewire would be > > worked out, but no

Re: pipewire in rawhide isn't working for me, no sound. Any pulseaudio / pipewire migration links welcome.

On Fri, 2021-07-02 at 11:35 -0700, stan via test wrote: > I am having trouble with sound in a new rawhide installation. I waited > for F35 because I thought the kinks in pipewire would be worked out, > but not so much for me. It might be something simple, but when I try to > turn of

pipewire in rawhide isn't working for me, no sound. Any pulseaudio / pipewire migration links welcome.

I am having trouble with sound in a new rawhide installation. I waited for F35 because I thought the kinks in pipewire would be worked out, but not so much for me. It might be something simple, but when I try to turn off cards, and assign cards to default, etc. it doesn't work. I can play

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 10:27 AM Lukas Ruzicka wrote: > Hello friends of Fedora, > > The Final Release Criterion that deals with basic sound recording as > proposed in this list has been added to Fedora 34 Final Release Criteria ( > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_34_Final_R

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

Hello friends of Fedora, The Final Release Criterion that deals with basic sound recording as proposed in this list has been added to Fedora 34 Final Release Criteria ( https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_34_Final_Release_Criteria#Recording_Basics ) and thus comes into force immediately. Thank

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

On 29/1/2021 8:40 am, Lukas Ruzicka wrote I have found a page that records audio and plays it back and I believe that we could use it for testing, check it: https://online-voice-recorder.com/ They privacy policies[1] also look good. "No registration is

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

> On Thu, 2021-01-28 at 14:55 +0100, Lukas Ruzicka wrote: > > Ok, after an offline part of discussion with @Kamil Paral > > , we both have agreed that: > > > > > >1. The beta criterion for *Working sound *should remain as is now (no > >chan

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 7:54 AM Kamil Paral wrote: > On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 3:45 AM Robbi Nespu > wrote: > >> On Arch wiki mentioned "Firefox (84+) supports this method by default, >> while on Chromium (73+) one needs to enable WebRTC PipeWire support by >> setting the corresponding (experiment

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 9:13 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > pipewire replaces completely pulseaudio and jack _daemons_ > > ie, now you might have jackd or pulseaudio running, after the switch you > will just have pipewire. All the pulseaudio clients and jack clients > talk to pipewire, and think it's th

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 3:45 AM Robbi Nespu wrote: > On Arch wiki mentioned "Firefox (84+) supports this method by default, > while on Chromium (73+) one needs to enable WebRTC PipeWire support by > setting the corresponding (experimental) flag" this is for WebRTC screen > sharing, not sure it al

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

On 28/1/2021 9:55 pm, Lukas Ruzicka wrote: Ok, after an offline part of discussion with @Kamil Paral <mailto:kpa...@redhat.com>, we both have agreed that: 1. The beta criterion for *Working sound *should remain as is now (no change needed). 2. We would like to introduce a *new

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

or tools or apis are > changed, so we still use pulseaudio API, jack API, jack tools and > pulseaudio tools for everything. Evaluation of this should be on how > similar the old setup was to the new one, there should ideally be no > difference, nobody should notice a change, ideally.*

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

On Thu, 2021-01-28 at 14:55 +0100, Lukas Ruzicka wrote: > Ok, after an offline part of discussion with @Kamil Paral > , we both have agreed that: > > >    1. The beta criterion for *Working sound *should remain as is now (no >    change needed). >    2. We would like to i

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

mework. I think that the working sound criterion should apply to audio > > as in audio framework and not to individual applications, that might be > > judged according to the "default application functionality" criterion. > > Therefore, limiting to gstreamer based ap

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

On Thu, 2021-01-28 at 12:33 +0100, Lukas Ruzicka wrote: > > The most important change we are facing now is that > * PipeWire is here to support everything and if it does not, the operating > system has major flaws.* ...but for the last several years we've been in effectively the same situation on

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

Sounds good to me. Jan From: Lukas Ruzicka Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2021 3:55 PM To: For testing and quality assurance of Fedora releases ; Kamil Paral Subject: Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion Ok, after an offline part of

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

Ok, after an offline part of discussion with @Kamil Paral , we both have agreed that: 1. The beta criterion for *Working sound *should remain as is now (no change needed). 2. We would like to introduce a *new final criterion *saying*: **"The installed system must be able to r

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

, there should ideally be no difference, nobody should notice a change, ideally.*" does not have to imply that "sound data" go to PulseAudio first and then to PipeWire. I believe that PipeWire mimics the PulseAudio ports to handle the situation by itself. However, I was not able to find

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 12:36 PM Lukas Ruzicka wrote: > I do understand the audio criterion quite differently. I believe that an > application is an application, while an audio framework is an audio > framework. I think that the working sound criterion should apply to audio >

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 11:16 AM Kamil Paral wrote: > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 7:35 PM Adam Williamson < > adamw...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > >> The reason the current criterion specifies "with gstreamer-based >> applications" is to avoid being too broad a

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 7:35 PM Adam Williamson wrote: > The reason the current criterion specifies "with gstreamer-based > applications" is to avoid being too broad and vague. It really *means* > "sound must basically work", but we're referring to gstreamer on

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 7:39 PM Jan K wrote: > It would be nice to have working sound on virtual machines as well. If you > could add instructions or note(s) whether this would be possible at this > stage it would be appreciated. > If it should work, it could be tested as well. >

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

It would be nice to have working sound on virtual machines as well. If you could add instructions or note(s) whether this would be possible at this stage it would be appreciated. If it should work, it could be tested as well. (There are some challenges even with current sound systems, so it is

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

sal to modify the %subj. > > > > > > > It's good to link to the existing version, so that people can compare: > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_34_Beta_Release_Criteria#Working_sound > > > > > > > I have tried severa

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

on, so that people can compare: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_34_Beta_Release_Criteria#Working_sound > > >> I have tried several version and I did not like any, so finally I am >> proposing this text: >> >> *Working sound* >> >> *The installed

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

ria#Working_sound > I have tried several version and I did not like any, so finally I am > proposing this text: > > *Working sound* > > *The installed system must be able to play back and record audio.* > This probably needs something like "(if relevant hardware is present)

Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

Hello friends of Fedora, I have been thinking about a proposal to modify the %subj. I have tried several version and I did not like any, so finally I am proposing this text: *Working sound* *The installed system must be able to play back and record audio.* This is a very short and general

Re: Sound problems with skype in F21

> anybody runs skype-4.3.0.37-fc16.i586 in F21 with pulseaudio sound? On > >>> my box, skype does not produce any sound. Trying the same in F20 runs > >>> flawlessly (with sound and identical skype rpm). Then you are still ahead of me. More precisely from time of F20 skype

Re: Sound problems with skype in F21

On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 1:52 PM, John Dulaney wrote: >> To: test@lists.fedoraproject.org >> From: rdie...@math.unl.edu >> Subject: Re: Sound problems with skype in F21 >> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 06:46:53 -0500 >> >> Temlakos wrote: >> >> > T

Re: Sound problems with skype in F21

On Qui, 2014-09-18 at 12:27 +0200, Joachim Backes wrote: > Hello F21 testers, > > anybody runs skype-4.3.0.37-fc16.i586 in F21 with pulseaudio sound? On > my box, skype does not produce any sound. Trying the same in F20 runs > flawlessly (with sound and identical skype rpm). I

RE: Sound problems with skype in F21

> To: test@lists.fedoraproject.org > From: rdie...@math.unl.edu > Subject: Re: Sound problems with skype in F21 > Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 06:46:53 -0500 > > Temlakos wrote: > > > That suggests when I do the upgrade from F20->F21, I should use > > pulseaudio wit

Re: Sound problems with skype in F21

Temlakos wrote: > That suggests when I do the upgrade from F20->F21, I should use > pulseaudio with no latency. True? Do you even need it on F20 anymore? (perhaps skype has been fixed to not require that workaround) -- Rex -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: http

Re: Sound problems with skype in F21

On 09/18/2014 07:37 AM, Joachim Backes wrote: On 09/18/2014 12:57 PM, Joachim Backes wrote: On 09/18/2014 12:29 PM, Temlakos wrote: On 09/18/2014 06:27 AM, Joachim Backes wrote: Hello F21 testers, anybody runs skype-4.3.0.37-fc16.i586 in F21 with pulseaudio sound? On my box, skype does not

Re: Sound problems with skype in F21

On 09/18/2014 12:57 PM, Joachim Backes wrote: > On 09/18/2014 12:29 PM, Temlakos wrote: >> On 09/18/2014 06:27 AM, Joachim Backes wrote: >>> Hello F21 testers, >>> >>> anybody runs skype-4.3.0.37-fc16.i586 in F21 with pulseaudio sound? On >>> my box,

Re: Sound problems with skype in F21

On 09/18/2014 12:29 PM, Temlakos wrote: > On 09/18/2014 06:27 AM, Joachim Backes wrote: >> Hello F21 testers, >> >> anybody runs skype-4.3.0.37-fc16.i586 in F21 with pulseaudio sound? On >> my box, skype does not produce any sound. Trying the same in F20 runs &g

Re: Sound problems with skype in F21

On 09/18/2014 06:27 AM, Joachim Backes wrote: Hello F21 testers, anybody runs skype-4.3.0.37-fc16.i586 in F21 with pulseaudio sound? On my box, skype does not produce any sound. Trying the same in F20 runs flawlessly (with sound and identical skype rpm). Any help is appreciated. Kind regards

Sound problems with skype in F21

Hello F21 testers, anybody runs skype-4.3.0.37-fc16.i586 in F21 with pulseaudio sound? On my box, skype does not produce any sound. Trying the same in F20 runs flawlessly (with sound and identical skype rpm). Any help is appreciated. Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 21 (Twenty

Re: F20 No Sound in KDE

On Seg, 2013-11-25 at 13:50 -0600, Mike Chambers wrote: > Since doing an update yesterday on my KDE F20 test system, I lost my > sound. When in KDE and right click on the sound icon on the task bar, > click on Audio Setup, you see my sound card but not highlighted where > they can

F20 No Sound in KDE

Since doing an update yesterday on my KDE F20 test system, I lost my sound. When in KDE and right click on the sound icon on the task bar, click on Audio Setup, you see my sound card but not highlighted where they can be selected, as in they are grayed out. It happens on both the new kernel and

Re: sound

On Tue, 2013-06-11 at 21:12 -0700, Richard Vickery wrote: > On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 7:36 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Tue, 2013-06-11 at 10:38 -0700, Richard Vickery wrote: > > > >> Thanks for the reply, I may likely have needed them had I not figured > >> out the solution; although Mr. Guomu

Re: sound

On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 7:36 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Tue, 2013-06-11 at 10:38 -0700, Richard Vickery wrote: > >> Thanks for the reply, I may likely have needed them had I not figured >> out the solution; although Mr. Guomundsson's solution returned the >> following: >> >> $ pulseaudio >> E

Re: sound

On Tue, 2013-06-11 at 10:38 -0700, Richard Vickery wrote: > Thanks for the reply, I may likely have needed them had I not figured > out the solution; although Mr. Guomundsson's solution returned the > following: > > $ pulseaudio > E: [pulseaudio] pid.c: Daemon already running. > E: [pulseaudio] m

Re: sound

updates on F19? On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 11:47 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > On 06/11/2013 02:22 AM, Richard Vickery wrote: >> >> Hi gang: >> >> It may be my ignorance - I probably know this but am unaware of it at >> the moment; since upgrading t

Re: sound

On 06/11/2013 02:22 AM, Richard Vickery wrote: Hi gang: It may be my ignorance - I probably know this but am unaware of it at the moment; since upgrading to tc2 (and perhaps tc1), I lost my sound. Any hints on how to get it back? Thanks, Richard Try running "pulseaudio -k &

Re: sound

On Mon, 2013-06-10 at 19:22 -0700, Richard Vickery wrote: > Hi gang: > > It may be my ignorance - I probably know this but am unaware of it at > the moment; since upgrading to tc2 (and perhaps tc1), I lost my sound. > Any hints on how to get it back? the 'TC' numbers are

sound

Hi gang: It may be my ignorance - I probably know this but am unaware of it at the moment; since upgrading to tc2 (and perhaps tc1), I lost my sound. Any hints on how to get it back? Thanks, Richard -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https

Re: Settings panel for desktop file gnome-sound-panel.desktop could not be loaded!

On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote: > Feb 16 13:13:02 localhost /etc/gdm/Xsession[10257]: JS LOG: Settings panel > for desktop file gnome-sound-panel.desktop could not be loaded! > Feb 16 13:13:09 localhost /etc/gdm/Xsession[10257]: JS LOG: Settings panel > for

Settings panel for desktop file gnome-sound-panel.desktop could not be loaded!

Feb 16 13:13:02 localhost /etc/gdm/Xsession[10257]: JS LOG: Settings panel for desktop file gnome-sound-panel.desktop could not be loaded! Feb 16 13:13:09 localhost /etc/gdm/Xsession[10257]: JS LOG: Settings panel for desktop file gnome-sound-panel.desktop could not be loaded! $ cat /usr/share

Re: Sound devices no longer accessible by audio group

On 12/04/2012 10:12 PM, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote: On 12/04/2012 04:07 AM, Brendan Jones wrote: On 12/04/2012 10:39 AM, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote: Since the latest yum update I have to run audio programs as root in order to access an audio device. Previously being a member o

Re: Sound devices no longer accessible by audio group

On 12/04/2012 04:07 AM, Brendan Jones wrote: On 12/04/2012 10:39 AM, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote: Since the latest yum update I have to run audio programs as root in order to access an audio device. Previously being a member of audio group was sufficient. Running audio programs as root

Re: Sound devices no longer accessible by audio group

On 12/04/2012 10:39 AM, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote: Since the latest yum update I have to run audio programs as root in order to access an audio device. Previously being a member of audio group was sufficient. Running audio programs as root should not be necessary and is almost never e

Sound devices no longer accessible by audio group

Since the latest yum update I have to run audio programs as root in order to access an audio device. Previously being a member of audio group was sufficient. -- Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R c...@omen.com www.omen.com Developer of Industrial ZMODEM(Tm) for Embedded Applications Omen Techn

Re: gmplayer in F17: shows no video, only plays sound

On 05/01/2012 12:06 PM, Nicolas Chauvet wrote: > 2012/5/1 Ed Greshko : >> On 05/01/2012 05:46 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: >>> The same thing happens for me in F16 with >> >> Opppsss... It wasn't the same thing. It was actually a configuration error. >> gmplayer seemed to have defaulted to trying to use

Re: gmplayer in F17: shows no video, only plays sound

2012/5/1 Ed Greshko : > On 05/01/2012 05:46 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: >> The same thing happens for me in F16 with > > Opppsss...  It wasn't the same thing.  It was actually a configuration error. > gmplayer seemed to have defaulted to trying to use libvdpau_nvidia.so which > doesn't > exist on my sys

Re: gmplayer in F17: shows no video, only plays sound

On 05/01/2012 05:46 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: > The same thing happens for me in F16 with Opppsss... It wasn't the same thing. It was actually a configuration error. gmplayer seemed to have defaulted to trying to use libvdpau_nvidia.so which doesn't exist on my system. Working now for mebut I

Re: gmplayer in F17: shows no video, only plays sound

ying the DVD with *"mplayer /dev/sr0"* (picture is >>> shown), but using gmplayer with /dev/sr0 as device only plays sound :-( >>> >>> Installed: >>> >>> mplayer-1.0-0.135.20120205svn.fc17.x86_64 >>> mplayer-gui-1.0-0.135.20120205svn.fc17.x8

Re: gmplayer in F17: shows no video, only plays sound

own), but using gmplayer with /dev/sr0 as device only plays sound :-( >> >> Installed: >> >> mplayer-1.0-0.135.20120205svn.fc17.x86_64 >> mplayer-gui-1.0-0.135.20120205svn.fc17.x86_64 >> >> Any hints? >> > > Where did you get gmplayer for F17? >

Re: gmplayer in F17: shows no video, only plays sound

On 05/01/2012 04:59 PM, Joachim Backes wrote: > Hi, > > did somebody try to play a video DVD (VIDEO_TS) by *gmplayer*? I'm > successful in playing the DVD with *"mplayer /dev/sr0"* (picture is > shown), but using gmplayer with /dev/sr0 as device only plays sound :-(

Re: gmplayer in F17: shows no video, only plays sound

On 05/01/2012 10:59 AM, Joachim Backes wrote: > Hi, > > did somebody try to play a video DVD (VIDEO_TS) by *gmplayer*? I'm > successful in playing the DVD with *"mplayer /dev/sr0"* (picture is > shown), but using gmplayer with /dev/sr0 as device only plays sound :-

gmplayer in F17: shows no video, only plays sound

Hi, did somebody try to play a video DVD (VIDEO_TS) by *gmplayer*? I'm successful in playing the DVD with *"mplayer /dev/sr0"* (picture is shown), but using gmplayer with /dev/sr0 as device only plays sound :-( Installed: mplayer-1.0-0.135.20120205svn.fc17.x86_64

Re: Inadequate sound device control

On Fri, 2012-04-20 at 17:46 +0200, Karel Volný wrote: > - but I repeat "I never had", 'cause ine pre-PA years I've been > using cards with hardware mixing; owners of the cheap integrated > ones may see that as a benefit, as previous attempts like ESD or > aRts weren't much better than PA either

Re: Inadequate sound device control

can I run this outside of GNOME which I do not use? The idea is you'd use a PA mixer native to whatever environment you want. Or simply pavucontrol, which gives you much the same stuff. > > they show up as options in a drop-down list. You can pick one > > input source at

Re: Inadequate sound device control

On Fri, 2012-04-20 at 17:46 +0200, Karel Volný wrote: > > > Either way, file a bug report > > that's what I've done > > - would you dare to guess what is the reaction? Not our problem? They have a very good SEP field generator. > > Yes, there is usually some initial pain when major subsystem

Re: Inadequate sound device control

ystem, after years of pain, finally begins to subside it > > will be rubbished and rebuilt from scratch again. Meh. > > It is so frustrating to hear people complaining about > pulseaudio like this. but I doubt it is as frustrating as being forced to use PulseAudio when plain old A

Re: Inadequate sound device control

Dne Út 17. dubna 2012 16:36:08, Adam Williamson napsal(a): > On Tue, 2012-04-17 at 14:36 +0200, Karel Volný wrote: > > now if there is only one volume control, how do I express > > that I want to mute the microphone and set the line-in to > > some value? > PA doesn't treat this as a question of vol

Re: Inadequate sound device control

people complaining about pulseaudio like this. Pulseaudio is an amazing improvement for the use of sound on Linux. For 99% of users, it just works like it should. I love how software mixing just works and I can easily switch between output devices and it even keeps separate volume settings for

Re: Inadequate sound device control

On Tue, 2012-04-17 at 16:13 -0500, John Morris wrote: > On Tue, 2012-04-17 at 14:36 +0200, Karel Volný wrote: > > > - how is this supposed to work with "one slider rule them all" > > type of control? > > It doesn't. And nobody cares, go buy hardware that works the way > Pottering imagines it 's

Re: Inadequate sound device control

On Tue, 2012-04-17 at 14:36 +0200, Karel Volný wrote: > - how is this supposed to work with "one slider rule them all" > type of control? It doesn't. And nobody cares, go buy hardware that works the way Pottering imagines it 'should' work is the closest you will get to real world advice. It do

Re: Inadequate sound device control

On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Jonathan Kamens wrote: > > If ALSA and pulseaudio worked better together, i.e., they were, between the > two of them, smart enough to automatically DTRT with the low-level sound > settings, then there would be no need for anyone but the real au

Re: Inadequate sound device control

Review request submitted! https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813420 Richard -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: Inadequate sound device control

On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Brendan Jones wrote: > On 04/17/2012 06:13 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: >> >> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Brendan Jones >>  wrote: >>> >>> Qastools is coming to Fedora soon which is Qt based [1]. It is also being >>> used in the Qt Razor desktop which I hope wil

Re: Inadequate sound device control

On 04/17/2012 06:13 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Brendan Jones wrote: Qastools is coming to Fedora soon which is Qt based [1]. It is also being used in the Qt Razor desktop which I hope will make it to Fedora someday [1] http://xwmw.org/qastools/ Try this: http:

Re: Inadequate sound device control

On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Brendan Jones wrote: > Qastools is coming to Fedora soon which is Qt based [1]. It is also being > used in the Qt Razor desktop which I hope will make it to Fedora someday > > [1] http://xwmw.org/qastools/ Try this: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/34775202/qastools/qasto

Re: Inadequate sound device control

On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Brendan Jones wrote: > Qastools is coming to Fedora soon which is Qt based [1]. It is also being > used in the Qt Razor desktop which I hope will make it to Fedora someday > > [1] http://xwmw.org/qastools/ Trying it out now. If I like it I'll submit a Review Requ

Re: Inadequate sound device control

On Tue, 2012-04-17 at 14:36 +0200, Karel Volný wrote: > now if there is only one volume control, how do I express that I > want to mute the microphone and set the line-in to some value? PA doesn't treat this as a question of volumes but a question of inputs, or, as GNOME volume control puts it,

Re: Inadequate sound device control

You could try xfce4-mixer. kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: Inadequate sound device control

On 04/17/2012 04:54 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: I've been following this thread with interest so I did some searching and found alsamixergui which is UGLY. I also found gnome-alsamixer for Debian/Ubuntu. The upstream seems to be dead but Debian is keeping it going, probably from lack of an alternativ

Re: Inadequate sound device control

I've been following this thread with interest so I did some searching and found alsamixergui which is UGLY. I also found gnome-alsamixer for Debian/Ubuntu. The upstream seems to be dead but Debian is keeping it going, probably from lack of an alternative. Between the SRPM from ATRPMs (Why is this

Re: Inadequate sound device control

x27;t want to write an ALSA mixer. So if you want a > > graphical ALSA mixer...find one and use it. GNOME doesn't > > consider themselves to be in the business of providing one. > > Well put Adam, thanks. That being said, we certainly want to > provide enough control to let

Re: Inadequate sound device control

On 4/17/2012 7:25 AM, Matthias Clasen wrote: Well put Adam, thanks. That being said, we certainly want to provide enough control to let people use their sound cards. If something is missing, by all means, let us know. But "I need control on the level of " is not a very concrete desc

Re: Inadequate sound device control

s to be in the business of > providing one. Well put Adam, thanks. That being said, we certainly want to provide enough control to let people use their sound cards. If something is missing, by all means, let us know. But "I need control on the level of " is not a very concrete descript

Re: Inadequate sound device control

On Sun, 2012-04-15 at 19:48 -0600, Michal Jaegermann wrote: > On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 04:23:31PM -0400, Jonathan Kamens wrote: > > On 04/15/2012 04:27 PM, stan wrote: > > >A thought on this. I'm not that familiar with pulseaudio, but some of > > >these settings *are* available in the pavucontrol a

Re: Inadequate sound device control

Dne Ne 15. dubna 2012 12:26:21, stan napsal(a): > On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 14:27:26 -0400 > > Jonathan Kamens wrote: > > These are not esoteric settings that only audiophiles use. I > > have to tweak them/regularly/ to get my speakers, headset, > > and microphone to play nicely together, due to another

Re: Inadequate sound device control

On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 16:23:31 -0400 Jonathan Kamens wrote: > On 04/15/2012 04:27 PM, stan wrote: > > A thought on this. I'm not that familiar with pulseaudio, but some > > of these settings *are* available in the pavucontrol application. > > It is a separate package you can install, called, stran

Re: Inadequate sound device control

On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 13:35:31 -0700 Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote: > My particular requirement is to control the audio input selection, > mute, and level on an Asus Xonar sound card. The only thing > that I found able to control that is "gnome-control-center sound". >

Re: Inadequate sound device control

elpful and solve my particular problem for me, and I appreciate that, but since I can already solve my particular problem with alsamixer, as yucky as that is, I'm much more interested in the general problem that most users aren't going to be able to figure out how to modify their

Re: Inadequate sound device control

On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 04:23:31PM -0400, Jonathan Kamens wrote: > On 04/15/2012 04:27 PM, stan wrote: > >A thought on this. I'm not that familiar with pulseaudio, but some of > >these settings *are* available in the pavucontrol application. It is a > >separate package you can install, called, st

Re: Inadequate sound device control

My particular requirement is to control the audio input selection, mute, and level on an Asus Xonar sound card. The only thing that I found able to control that is "gnome-control-center sound". Accordingly I have to create a launcher on my Xfce desktop. It would be nice if the o

Re: Inadequate sound device control

On 04/15/2012 04:27 PM, stan wrote: A thought on this. I'm not that familiar with pulseaudio, but some of these settings *are* available in the pavucontrol application. It is a separate package you can install, called, strangely enough, pavucontrol. There are other pulse control applications, a

Re: Inadequate sound device control

On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 14:27:26 -0400 Jonathan Kamens wrote: > I understand what you are saying, but you're missing the point. /It > should not be this hard/ to access detailed sound settings. If Fedora > is going to use pulseaudio, then pulseaudio needs to provide access > to t

Re: Inadequate sound device control

On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 14:27:26 -0400 Jonathan Kamens wrote: > These are not esoteric settings that only audiophiles use. I have to > tweak them/regularly/ to get my speakers, headset, and microphone to > play nicely together, due to another bug, i.e., that Fedora doesn't > seem to /remember/ my s

Re: Inadequate sound device control

On 04/15/2012 06:27 PM, Jonathan Kamens wrote: I love a lot of things about Fedora, but one of the things I absolutely hate is its penchant for ripping out things that work and replacing them with things that don't have nearly the same functionality, perhaps with an amorphous functionality to

  1   2   >