From nobody Tue Mar 11 14:27:26 2025 X-Original-To: freebsd-multimedia@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4ZBx1P4WJFz5qcwG for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2025 14:27:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from meka@tilda.center) Received: from mail.nsd1.sysit.solutions (meka.rs [109.93.255.137]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4ZBx1M4LDSz46qM for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2025 14:27:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from meka@tilda.center) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=tilda.center; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of meka@tilda.center designates 109.93.255.137 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=meka@tilda.center Received: from [192.168.111.162] (hal9000.nsd.sysit.solutions [192.168.111.162]) by mail.nsd1.sysit.solutions (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A4E8E81304 for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2025 14:27:26 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2025 15:27:26 +0100 List-Id: Multimedia discussions List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-multimedia List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-multimedia@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: Removing the -T option from virtual_oss? To: freebsd-multimedia@freebsd.org References: Content-Language: en-US From: =?UTF-8?Q?Goran_Meki=C4=87?= In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spamd-Result: default: False [1.66 / 15.00]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(1.00)[1.000]; NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(1.00)[1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.74)[-0.741]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[tilda.center,reject]; ONCE_RECEIVED(0.20)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; RCVD_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:8400, ipnet:109.92.0.0/15, country:RS]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-multimedia@freebsd.org]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-multimedia@freebsd.org]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4ZBx1M4LDSz46qM X-Spamd-Bar: + On 3/10/25 19:06, Christos Margiolis wrote: > I was wondering about the use of the -T option in virtual_oss. For one, > what the argument -T expects, is always going to be /dev/sndstat, so I > find that to be quite redundant in the first place. Also, is there a > case where we wouldn't want the device to be registered to sndstat? > > Attached is a patch based on the upstream [1]. I think it is more > sensible to register the device to sndstat unconditionally. > > Only problem with this is backwards compatibility. I suppose if we want > to not break things, we could alternatively make the -T option a no-op. > What do you think? > > Christos > > [1] https://github.com/freebsd/virtual_oss Hello, I'm using virtual_oss for years and I never understood why would anyone want to not register the device. I can't see any drawback in registering the device unconditionally. Regards, meka