On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 3:54 PM, fons@kokkinizita.net wrote:
Is this a regression in "mudita24" or a feature request for standard "envy24control"? I didn't change this aspect of the code, as far as I can tell.
The original has the same problem.
Well that's "good" to hear, in the sense that I didn't cause a regression for which there was no way to predict how i could have caused, it, from the changes made. (Another bug I know of https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=602900 )
However your complaint forced me to look at the code enough that it would be a pretty easy fix. I'd special case for "dac_senses==1" (apparently an unfortunate shorthand for dac sensitivity adjust), and "adc_senses==1". For that condition, I'd lay out the radiobutton first as the leftmost column, and afterwards all the sliders for the DACs, and then if same for ADC's, again same way.
If there's multiple adc_senses and dac_senses (i don't know if there are ice1712 card models that do this, but i'd hope that is the case, as one normally has a mixture of consumer and pro devices to hookup) then the original code putting a dac/adc sensitivity radiobutton under each associated slider would kick-in.
Since I don't have the card to test this aspect, hopefully someone from ALSA will comment on why things are the way they are. Because it might also be just as well to leave the code as-is and not cause regressions on cards we might not be able to test on (or even find: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=230506172001 ).
-- Niels http://nielsmayer.com