There was already a variable substitution. Skip it for the eval: case.
Fixes: 7b6da9ee ("ucm: add ${eval:EXPR} substitution (Syntax 5)")
Signed-off-by: Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz>
It is useful to read the top-level symlink and set the configuration
directory according this symlink for the relative paths.
Signed-off-by: Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz>
It is useful to do simple integer math in UCM configurations, too.
Use snd_config_evaluate_string() string for this job.
Example:
${eval:1+1}
${eval:100*$var1}
${eval:$[$var2+1]/5}
Signed-off-by: Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz>
The bellow commit caused regression for the SectionModifier parser. Revert
the single line change.
Fixes: 251bc204 ("ucm: implement RenameDevice and RemoveDevice verb management")
Fixes: https://github.com/alsa-project/alsa-lib/issues/167
Signed-off-by: Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz>
It seems that users are confused when the UCM configuration
is not ready for the particular hardware. Actually, we don't
allow a fine grained message classification in alsa-lib and
UCM API. Allow suppression of this specific type of messages
on the application request (typically alsactl).
BugLink: https://github.com/alsa-project/alsa-utils/issues/111
Signed-off-by: Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz>
The safe_strtol() function use strtol() which expects
to have the '0x' prefix for the hexadecimal number (when
base argument is zero).
BugLink: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/pipewire/pipewire/-/issues/1553
Signed-off-by: Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz>
To fix the build error on Android:
src/ucm/parser.c:2521:7: error: implicit declaration of function 'eaccess' is invalid in C99 [-Werror,-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
if (eaccess(filename, R_OK))
^
src/ucm/parser.c:2521:7: note: did you mean 'access'?
Signed-off-by: Chih-Wei Huang <cwhuang@linux.org.tw>
Signed-off-by: Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz>
src/ucm/main.c:788:8: error: implicit declaration of function 'WIFSIGNALED' is invalid in C99 [-Werror,-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
if (WIFSIGNALED(err)) {
^
src/ucm/main.c:790:10: error: implicit declaration of function 'WIFEXITED' is invalid in C99 [-Werror,-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
} if (WIFEXITED(err)) {
^
src/ucm/main.c:791:34: error: implicit declaration of function 'WEXITSTATUS' is invalid in C99 [-Werror,-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
if (ignore_error == false && WEXITSTATUS(err) != 0) {
Signed-off-by: Chih-Wei Huang <cwhuang@linux.org.tw>
Signed-off-by: Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz>
Fixes:
| ../../../alsa-lib-1.2.5/src/ucm/ucm_exec.c: In function 'find_exec':
| ../../../alsa-lib-1.2.5/src/ucm/ucm_exec.c:43:18: error: 'PATH_MAX' undeclared (first use in this function)
| 43 | char bin[PATH_MAX];
| | ^~~~~~~~
| ../../../alsa-lib-1.2.5/src/ucm/ucm_exec.c:43:18: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
| ../../../alsa-lib-1.2.5/src/ucm/ucm_exec.c: In function 'uc_mgr_exec':
| ../../../alsa-lib-1.2.5/src/ucm/ucm_exec.c:177:18: error: 'PATH_MAX' undeclared (first use in this function)
| 177 | char bin[PATH_MAX];
| | ^~~~~~~~
Fixes: https://github.com/alsa-project/alsa-lib/pull/145
Signed-off-by: Andreas Müller <schnitzeltony@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz>
The leading '+' in the keys specification add the key prefix
(sub-tree root identification) to the saved configuration.
Signed-off-by: Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz>
Allow to save whole (or partial) local UCM alsa library configuration
to a file.
Syntax (saves key1.key2 sub-tree):
Sequence [
cfg-save "/tmp/my-file.conf:key1.key2"
]
Signed-off-by: Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz>
This change renames the original exec command to shell which
is more appropriate. Implement a light version of the exec
command which calls directly the specified executable without
the shell interaction (man 3 system).
Signed-off-by: Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz>
When the user requests to ignore sysfs write errors by prefixing
the path with a '-' then we need to skip the '-' when building the
actual path otherwise the write will never work.
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz>
The application should know, that there is no special
initialization sequence. It's counterpart for
"ucm: return error if boot_list is empty".
Signed-off-by: Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz>
