arecord --max-file-time behavior

[thk686]

I do environmental sound recordings where arecord runs for months to years with --max-file-time set to something like 15 minutes. It is very nice to have this feature, yet there is one aspect that is problematic. It is not simple to know which file is currently being written. One can time stamp the file names and ignore the most recent, which is probably the simplest. Nonetheless, I wonder if it could be the case that the current write file could be named something else, such as the file name but preceded by a . or other indicator, and have it renamed to its intended name once it is closed and arecord has moved on to another file.

[JohnSauter]

I assume you know about --use-strftime which lets you place a time stamp and a file number in the file name. While marking the current output file with a special character would make identifying it a little simpler, the method you describe is almost as simple. I think you will need to make a better case to persuade someone to add this logic. Of course, you could always add it yourself.

[thk686]

I'll take a look at the code.

…

On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM John Sauter ***@***.***> wrote: I assume you know about --use-strftime which lets you place a time stamp and a file number in the file name. While marking the current output file with a special character would make identifying it a little simpler, the method you describe is almost as simple. I think you will need to make a better case to persuade someone to add this logic. Of course, you could always add it yourself. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#296 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAEQXSJFLD44GMVUCELDT7D2VTTITAVCNFSM6AAAAABZRC3WR6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDONBUHE4DQMJWGU> . You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***> [image: JohnSauter]*JohnSauter* left a comment (alsa-project/alsa-utils#296) <#296 (comment)> I assume you know about --use-strftime which lets you place a time stamp and a file number in the file name. While marking the current output file with a special character would make identifying it a little simpler, the method you describe is almost as simple. I think you will need to make a better case to persuade someone to add this logic. Of course, you could always add it yourself. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#296 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAEQXSJFLD44GMVUCELDT7D2VTTITAVCNFSM6AAAAABZRC3WR6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDONBUHE4DQMJWGU> . You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

-- Timothy H. Keitt www keittlab org

[thk686]

Just to follow up on this. Because arecord may have stopped processing, the most recent timestamp in a file name is ambiguous as to whether the file is active. The only method available currently is to wait a timeout past the last modification time of the file and hope that the timeout is long enough and the file system is reporting accurately.

[JohnSauter]

I am not sure what situation you are considering. Do you mean that arecord might fail unexpectedly? If that is what you mean I don't see how having arecord leave a mark in the file name to flag the active file helps, since arecord won't be able to clear that mark if it fails unexpectedly.