Some nits on the CLI:
On Mon, 2009-11-16 at 16:54 -0800, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
> audioctl list-devices
>
> audioctl show-device [-v] [-d device ]
>
> audioctl show-control [-v] [-d device] [control ...]
I find it odd that the object specifier for show-device requires an
option, but that show-control does not. It seems that all of the
subcommands operate on a device, so it would be natural to simply
specify that device as the final (perhaps optional) argument to each
subcommand (without a -d), and require options for everything else. For
example:
audioctl list-devices
audioctl show-device [-v] [device ]
audioctl show-control [-v] [-c control[,...]] [device]
audioctl set-control [-v] -c control=value[,...] device
audioctl save-controls -f file [device]
audioctl load-controls -f file [device]
The use of plural objects in subcommands is odd to me as well, but
that's not a big deal.
> audioctl set-control [-v] [-d device] control value
>
What would a -v option print in a set operation?
Also, the syntax proposed seems awkward. Why not use something more
common such as is parsed by getsubopt() like (for example):
-c <name>=<value>[,<name>=<value>...]
Is the device really optional here?
-Seb
