Am Sonntag, 22. Juli 2007 13:44:44 schrieb timecop: > I propose we setup #linuxtv-without-jews on feenode and coordinate our > efforts to take over those fools who run the real LinuxTV scam. > > -tc
Hello tc, could you please stay off from here with such a no-brain antisemitistic verbal crap? Thanks Uwe > > On 7/22/07, Uwe Bugla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Am Sonntag, 22. Juli 2007 12:41:56 schrieb Johannes Stezenbach: > > > On Sun, Jul 22, 2007, Uwe Bugla wrote: > > > > As announced I've built a revised tarball plus a Debian package of > > > > the current dvb-apps repository, implying your patchset (i. e. human > > > > readable characters as a switch for szap, tzap and czap. > > > > > > > > Unfortunately both packages were rejected without giving reason by > > > > the list moderator of [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > If you look at the reject messages, they should say: > > > > > > Reason: Message body is too big: 404226 bytes with a limit of 60 KB > > > and > > > Reason: Message body is too big: 517891 bytes with a limit of 60 KB > > > > > > The limit is there to protect people who don't have broadband > > > connectivity, and to protect the list server (with ~2000 list > > > subscribers, these two mails would have caused ~1.8 GByte of traffic). > > > > > > > > > Johannes > > > > Sounds logical. But the main reason you unfortunately forgot to mention: > > > > The limit is there to protect the "highly motivated illustrious" linuxtv > > gatekeepers from doing additional good work in order to share good > > efforts all around the world. > > > > I still got my own experiences and views on the difference between what > > real sophisticated maintainership means in practice @linuxtv.org in > > comparison to the rest of the world-wide linux community. In fact there > > is a big difference. > > > > For example, if I read comments like "you should first ask whether > > someone intends to pick it up (by Christoph Pfister in this specific > > example) the knife in my pocket opens. > > A real sophisticated maintainer picks up such efforts like P. van Gaans > > patch set and merges them without making any noise. > > > > Above that, the filter timeout problem in connection with "scan" still > > remains unsolved (wasn't it you, Johannes, who once wrote the scan > > utility?). > > > > Why is the scan result still such a drag? Why are the scan results so > > unreliable? Why are there channels missing in the final result? > > Is it a driver issue or an application issue? > > And who can help? Who has got the clue to fix that? > > And why does this problem not appear within kaffeine's channel scan? > > > > I'm not expecting any answer or fix for that problem - I can help myself. > > But I would like to know whether I am the only one to have that problem > > with the scan utility. > > > > Uwe > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > linux-dvb mailing list > > > linux-dvb@linuxtv.org > > > http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb > > > > _______________________________________________ > > linux-dvb mailing list > > linux-dvb@linuxtv.org > > http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb > > _______________________________________________ > linux-dvb mailing list > linux-dvb@linuxtv.org > http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb _______________________________________________ linux-dvb mailing list linux-dvb@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
