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 as well as the list. Maybe I should've read my message
through better before sending, I didn't mean to accuse anyone of
anything or sound irritable.
Thanks
Kendell clark
On 09/22/2015 04:51 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
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 the bottom of the message? Top would be better for
> me, but I also don't want to irritate anyone, since I've been yelled at
> on the arch list for top posting, even though as a blind person it makes
> following messages, especially long threads like this, easier.
> Sorry for the OT
This list traditionally follows the good rule of *not* top-posting, and
commenting inline.
You are the only one top-posting and breaking the thread as far as I can
see. You also commented on a sub-thread that had no top-posting
whatsoever and seem perfectly understandable, and replied to my post as
if I was the cause of your trouble (which doesn't seem so from the
content of your post), so your comment may come a little bit irritating.
It sucks that gmail has poor threading support and confuses you, but you
chose that tool, maybe you can find something better.
Simo.
>
>
> On 09/22/2015 01:29 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
>> 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.massullo(a)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 volume suddenly reached the 100%. I was shocked,
>>>>> having
>>>>> the maximum audio level shooted in your ears is a painful
>>>>> experience.
>>>>> The conference application that triggered PulseAudio pushing volume
>>>>> to
>>>>> maximum level probably should have never asked the system for a
>>>>> 100%
>>>>> audio level, but on the other hand, PulseAudio should never allow
>>>>> an
>>>>> application to make such sudden changes.
>>>>> To avoid that, you have to set
>>>>> flat-volumes = no
>>>>> in /etc/pulse/daemon.conf
>>>>
>>>> This is a non-sensical request. If an app uses the mixer APIs to set
>>>> the volume of something to very loud, that's what happens. Flat
>>>> volumes have nothing to do with that.
>>>>
>>>> I mean, the app you are using shouldn't set the volume like this,
and
>>>> that's the key here. If you turn off flat volumes you win about
>>>> nothing, you just work around this specific app. Soon the next app
>>>> will come along and play the same game with the actual device volume,
>>>> and you won *zero*.
>>>>
>>>> Don't mix flat volumes with misbheaving apps. Turning off flat
>>>> volumes
>>>> is a hack around the broken apps at best, and completely pointless..
>>>
>>> For better or worse, misbehaving apps are a reality that is probably
>>> not going to go away... I think we need to have a volume control
>>> approach that is at least somewhat tolerant against such apps and has
>>> some safeguards.
>>
>> Indeed, sticking your head in the sand and saying it is a misbehaving
>> app is not a useful answer.
>>
>> Apps misbehave, its a fact of life, you can deal with it, or not deal
>> with it, if you do not deal with it you have a bad system that causes
>> grief.
>>
>> I disabled flat-volumes long ago for the same reasons people had to in
>> this thread. Yes in theory I can beg every app to be perfect, but in the
>> mean time I can't get my ears blasted (or in some cases end up with
>> un-audible input/output). whatever it is with flat-volumes I could never
>> figure out what was going on, while w/o flat-volumes it is very simple
>> as each app is individually either low or high and an app raising its
>> volume doesn't cause all other apps to disappear never to return ...
>>
>> Disabling flat-volumes may be a workaround but it works very well
>> apparently. So something probably needs to be improved in flat-volumes,
>> and until then it is as good an option to disable it by default.
>>
>> Simo.
>>