On Thu, 2009-04-23 at 10:16 +0500, Suren Karapetyan wrote: > On Thursday 23 April 2009 08:40:43 Dave Jones wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 05:46:11PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > > Good thing it doesn't happen on other more common cards then. > > Like say, the emu10k1. > > http://www.codemonkey.org.uk/junk/wtf/alsa-mixer-o-doom.jpg > > > > And what about another card which is at least as popular? > I'm talking about HDA cards. > Have you ever been able to get any mic input (e.g. for voip) > on any HDA card without messing with all the channels? > I always had to select the source manually then find which of the controls > changes volume and then do some tuning to find optimal volume/noise ratio. > Yes, this is very ugly but it's much better than no mic input at all. > > P.S. This doesn't create much problems for me, > just another reason to stick with KDE/kmix. > But I'm sure there are many people who want to use a SIP softphone with GNOME. Clearly the argument is now getting confused, because I'm in *favour* of having a legacy mixer available, not against it...the argument about having large numbers of channels is that it's overwhelming and confusing and hence we should be supported PulseAudio in abstracting them all away. -- 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@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
