system-config-soundcard: why?

[Jeff Spaleta]

On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 12:13 PM, Janina Sajka <janina at rednote.net> wrote:

> We really need something more friendly than that steady state sine wave
> for
> this test sound.  We also need more understandable device designations,
> imho. It's just not very consumer friendly as it stands.
>

I'm not arguing that its optimal.. but my point is... its meets the
requirements for hardware testing.  I'm really not sure why it needs to be
something other than a tone for testing, but I'm not going to argue against
it.

So far its been a much better interface for me to test individual devices
when I needed to, alsa,oss,pulse layers are all exposed seperately. The
detected hardware is exposed separately.  From a troubleshooting pov it
helps me narrow down problems much more precisely than s-c-soundcard.

I'd rather see the pref dialog enhanced to play a pleasant sound or to do
things like stereo speaker testing...than continue to see s-c-soundcard held
on to for pretty trivial enhancements.


>
> It's nice having the capibility to direct audio by application class,
> but I'd still like more control, myself. I'd like to be able to direct
> audio application byh application--I have four audio devices on one
> system and three on another--but I still have no finite control of what
> device my Orca plus Espeak will use. I make great use of these kinds of
> arguments in the cli, and I'm frustrated when apps (like timidity) don't
> support specific direction.
>

This is beyond the issue of whether or not s-c-soundcard still has any
relevance at all compared to functionality exposed elsewhere.  This issue at
hand is whether or not we can nuke s-c-soundcard as a codebase.  I think we
can.

-jef
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20080326/712c9da5/attachment.htm>