On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 04:18:16PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
Of course, it's a question how fine-grained each file should be. But in general, modifying the default configuration just for adding a new, fairly independent item is a bad idea. In my scenario: you want to add the support for a new hardware -- fine, just add the file without changing anything else. This would make the maintenance a lot easier
Yeah, I can see embedded people liking this too - a relatively small proportion of machines end up submitting their code to mainline for various reasons and carrying patches is no fun.
(imagine you maintain a distro package).
Or use one, for that matter - if you've got local changes then you need to resolve the conflicts between them and the distro versions on every upgrade.
I'm not sure. The restore action will always overwrite all 'init' values (at least when control identifier list is not changed in the driver). Probably, I would prefer a buildin procedure like 'if restore fails then do init'. What about 'alsactl boot' action name?
The init makes sense in the case when the driver is updated and some new controls. Then the newly added controls are set up properly, then the other values are overwritten via restore.
I've not looked at the new code yet but it would be *really* nice to have a format where only the control names are used.