Re: [Flightgear-devel] FGCOM again, mixer mess

[AnMaster <anm...@te...>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

There are quite a few reasons why fgcom shouldn't touch mixer settings:
1) Changing/muting master prevents sound from applications like flightgear and
festival (flightgear got built in support for festival that I use) Even if there
is a reason to mute this, it isn't realistic, the engine sound isn't turned off
in a real airplane...
2) Why not do it in the software of fgcom. To mute: just stop listening.

Holger Wirtz wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 11:17:46AM +0100, AnMaster wrote:
> [...]
>>>> it would leave the mixer settings I use alone. I will wait for this bug to get
>>>> fixed before I try it again.
>>> I must say that I haven't tried the OSS version until now. I hope that I
>>> can do this at weekend. After all this may be a problem with iaxclient
>>> 1.x and/or 64 bit. For 32bit I will check this and post my results here.
>> Well I would prefer native ALSA support but as showed in earlier mail that
>> didn't even compile. FYI I use in kernel ALSA driver (emu10k1) for my card
>> (Creative Labs SB Live! EMU10k1 (rev 07)). Also using OpenAL sounds like a good
>> alternative to me, it is cross platform and works well in my experience. Doesn't
>> flightgear itself use OpenAL?
> 
> Yes I think so. But fgcom uses the VoIP backend iaxclient which does not
> support OpenAL until someone writes the code. For the most Linux-Users
> ALSA would be the right choice. But native ALSA may conflict with other
> applications (see the PTT key problem which Csaba find out).
> 
Why would native ALSA conflict with other programs? If you mean mixer, either
use dmix or, if your sound card got one, hardware mixer. Set up your ALSA for that.

However, what should one use on FreeBSD? I haven't yet got fgcom to work on my
FreeBSD system (FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE-p8 x86_64). OpenAL works just fine on it.

For the PTT key problem, well I would rather use the MIC on/off button that is
on the cable to my headset anyway.

> Yes - this is difficult to solve and we (I?) have to think about this
> more than twice the next days.
> 
> Regards, Holger
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHRq6eWmK6ng/aMNkRCh4dAJ9wz9TZuiR5LhwcboqaDmSEk/I2dACdFxoB
XA8B68niOqidWrkd1wDHyGs=
=/5Ef
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----