On Fri, 2014-08-22 at 12:11 +0200, David Henningsson wrote: > > On 2014-08-20 12:17, Tanu Kaskinen wrote: > > On Tue, 2014-08-19 at 17:05 +0200, David Henningsson wrote: > >> > >> On 2014-08-19 12:09, Tanu Kaskinen wrote: > >>> "Desktop Speaker"? > >> > >> AFAICR, I've never seen "Desktop Speaker". I think we can synchronise > >> the behavior so that it is the same on "analog-output" and > >> "analog-output-speaker". > > > > My patch is made with the assumption that analog-output should be > > suppressed always when there there are more specific paths available, > > with the exception of analog-output-mono (the patch removes also the > > "Master Mono" element from analog-output, but as I said earlier, that > > was a mistake). Based on this discussion, it seems that you either > > disagree with that basic assumption, or weren't properly aware of that > > assumption. If you think that the assumption is bad, I'd like you to > > give an example where that assumption causes breakage. > > The question is if there ever can be the combination of e g > analog-output-headphones and analog-output, when analog-output is > controlling something we did not foresee, but still might be useful to > control. > But since I was unable to come up with a good example, feel free to go > ahead and remove the two headphone elements and sync Desktop Speaker > with analog-output-speaker. Sorry for a late reply, but I didn't notice the last point that you made until now. Why should I sync analog-output's Desktop Speaker with analog-output-speaker, as opposed to removing Desktop Speaker from analog-output? If the Desktop Speaker element exists, then the analog-output-desktop-speaker port will be created, and since that's more specific than analog-output, analog-output should be suppressed. Therefore, there's no reason for analog-output to care about Desktop Speaker. -- Tanu
