On Tue, Feb 17, 2026 at 09:31:20AM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Feb 2026 at 05:29, Sergei Heifetz <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > This patch adds the `audio` option to meson_options.txt. It is
> > propagated into Kconfig as AUDIO. It is enabled by default.
> > The corresponding `--disable-audio` and `--enable-audio` options
> > for `configure` are also added.
> >
> > For now, this option does nothing. In subsequent patches, it will
> > gradually disable audio in different places. The final goal is to stop
> > building sources from `audio/` and `hw/audio/` and other audio-related
> > files (except for some stubs). Note that this intent is different from
> > `-audio none`, which mutes audio but still compiles the audio subsystem.
> 
> Not building audio/ code makes sense, but do we really want to
> stop building hw/audio code ? That's the guest facing audio
> devices, and if for instance a machine type has an embedded
> sound device that would require us to stop compiling that
> machine. I think it would be very confusing for users if
> --disable-audio meant "we will silently not build half the
> Arm boards that have a pl041 in them".
> 
> Maybe it would be better if "--disable-audio" meant "don't build
> the audio backends, and everything behaves as if the user
> passed -audio none" ?

Don't we already have the ability to disable individual audio backends ?
Each of them relies on a different 3rd party library that we have to
check for, with none of them being mandatory. 

I feel like we shouldn't have a "--disable-audio" at all. For backends
we always go for having ways to disable individual dependencies, and
for frontends we provide Kconfig for fine tuning what's enabled for
a given target.

With regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com       ~~        https://hachyderm.io/@berrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org          ~~          https://entangle-photo.org :|
|: https://pixelfed.art/berrange   ~~    https://fstop138.berrange.com :|


Reply via email to