On Mon, Dec 20, 2004 at 10:46:41AM +0000, John Pullan wrote: > On Mon, 2004-12-20 at 10:31 +0000, Tom Hughes wrote: > > > > > I wish I knew how STB's really did this kind of stuff. I suspect that > > > because it's propriety hardware they can do more stuff. or maybe we just > > > need a better mechanism for detecting lack of lock in the scan case. > > > > Well given that the UK muxes transmit a network table you only have > > to find one frequency by scanning and you can then locate the others > > using the network table so maybe they do that? > > > > Which is what we do. But the pathological case is still not good. I'll > have to have a play about with it sometime. >
Perhaps this can be optimized somewhat. Initiate a scan of channels 21 thru 69 looking only a carrier. Then once you find it, look for all the sub channels on that mux. If in the case of the UK you find a network table that provides information on the other mux channel locations then just skip to those channels and scan them. You can always allow for a fallback case of scanning everything, maybe call it an exhaustive scan or something... Stuart
_______________________________________________ mythtv-dev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-dev
