Re: audio restore functionaility
On Monday 20 July 2015 18:04:33 Brian wrote:
> On Mon 20 Jul 2015 at 17:35:43 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > On Monday 20 July 2015 17:13:48 Brian wrote:
> > > On Mon 20 Jul 2015 at 10:53:33 -0400, Gary Dale wrote:
> > > > On 20/07/15 10:20 AM, William Hadfield-Burkardt wrote:
> > > > >I'm new to Debian.
> > > > >
> > > > >Someone else configured the system for me. It was running o.k.
> > > > >
> > > > >Then I downloaded and installed (using the synaptic package
> > > > >manager) a speech recognition software (pocketsphinx). I removed
> > > > >it without ever having used it.
> > > > >
> > > > >Now the audio does not work. Neither in the browser (iceweasel)
> > > > >nor with VLC media player.
> > > > >
> > > > >Is there a straight-forward "restore" function for the relevant
> > > > > software?
> > > > >
> > > > >William
> > > >
> > > > Yes. You can switch to root, purge then reinstall the sound package
> > > > (pulseaudio). However, I'd first recommend making sure the output
> > > > volume wasn't simply turned down.
> > > >
> > > > If it wasn't, I'd then suspect that pocketsphinx didn't restore the
> > > > old settings when you removed it. Try running LC_ALL=C.
> > >
> > > The solution to every audio problem is not purging pulseaudio. Have you
> > > looked at the software in question? It depends on libc6 and three
> > > libraries. Installing the package doesn't alter anything as there are
> > > no maintainer scripts run. Purging it does not mute previosly unmuted
> > > channels (as shown by alsamixer).
> > >
> > > Installing pocketsphinx and now having non-working audio are unrelated.
> >
> > It is possible, is it not, that pocketshinx mutes something by default
> > and hasn't unmuted it?
>
> Only in the sense that it is possible there are fairies at the bottom
> of my garden. :)
:-)
> More seriously: the OP never ran the program. The installation-purging
> cycle is easy enough for anyone to carry out and observe the effect on
> the audio system. My test was on a machine without pulseaudio. The
> result was negative.
Post hoc yet again not meaning propter hoc???? ;-)
But we don't really know much about what the OP did. We haven't heard from
him since his initial enquiry.
Lisi
Reply to: