On Tue, 10 May 2016, at 08:58 PM, Tanu Kaskinen wrote: > On Sat, 2016-05-07 at 10:43 +0530, Arun Raghavan wrote: > > On Fri, 2016-05-06 at 15:40 +0300, Tanu Kaskinen wrote: > > > On Fri, 2016-05-06 at 13:43 +0530, arun at accosted.net wrote: > > > > @@ -520,6 +525,9 @@ static pa_hook_result_t sink_input_move_finish_cb(pa_core *core, pa_sink_input * > > > > Â Â Â Â Â if (pa_proplist_gets(i->proplist, PA_PROP_FILTER_APPLY_MOVING)) > > > > Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â return PA_HOOK_OK; > > > > Â > > > > +Â Â Â Â /* If we're managing m-d-m.ignore on this, remove and re-add if we're continuing to manage it */ > > >Â > > > This comment gets out of date after you rename the property in the next > > > patch. (Same for the source output code.) > >Â > > Out-of-date in what sense? We do want to continue the same behaviour of > > only managing the property on the stream if we actually loaded a filter > > for it. > > In the sense that the comment mentions "m-d-m.ignore", while the actual > property name is "m-d-m.auto_filtered". Ah, right. Fixed that. -- Arun
