| |||||||||||||
Raghavan: PulseConf 2012: ReportRaghavan: PulseConf 2012: ReportPosted Nov 9, 2012 9:29 UTC (Fri) by Eckhart (guest, #74500)In reply to: Raghavan: PulseConf 2012: Report by epa Parent article: Raghavan: PulseConf 2012: Report
> I don't know why LWN gives such uncritically positive coverage to PulseAudio. I am quite happy doing audio mixing on my system with the traditional shell scripts and using runlevels to control the volume.
Out of curiosity: what is your runlevel → volume mapping? I tried this once and wasn't satisfied with the precision (due to the limited number of runlevels).
(Log in to post comments)
Raghavan: PulseConf 2012: Report Posted Nov 9, 2012 11:12 UTC (Fri) by epa (subscriber, #39769) [Link]
You simply run your system inside a virtual machine and combine the runlevels there and the host system to get the exact volume. For example runlevel 3 times runlevel 5 == 15. Of course there are those who don't understand this elegant system and are doomed to reinvent it poorly.
Raghavan: PulseConf 2012: Report Posted Nov 9, 2012 11:43 UTC (Fri) by Eckhart (guest, #74500) [Link]
> You simply run your system inside a virtual machine and combine the runlevels there and the host system to get the exact volume. For example runlevel 3 times runlevel 5 == 15. Of course there are those who don't understand this elegant system and are doomed to reinvent it poorly.
Thank you, that did the trick. :-)
As a side node, this is also the first compelling use case for virtualization I came across.
Raghavan: PulseConf 2012: Report Posted Nov 9, 2012 12:34 UTC (Fri) by sdalley (subscriber, #18550) [Link]
Thanks, that's the best laugh I've had for a long time!
Ahh, reductio ad absurdum^Wnirvanam. In the same vein, see http://xkcd.com/378/ .
|
|||||||||||||