On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 07:15:59AM -0500, Cory Papenfuss wrote: > >In other words, mythtv might be overkill, considering you are not > >getting all the stuff it does well -- coordination of listings etc. > > > Yes, but if you're using the same machine for MythTV currently, > how will you guarantee that you won't have a tuner conflict? The point of > using mythtv to record is that you can set up whatever profile you want > easily (pick resolution, bitrate, etc), and have Mythtv scheduler know > about it. If you've got more than one tuner, it can still record > something else, rather than get confused when an input that should work is > busy. > > I think that "schedule-less" video sources would be a > not-that-unusual thing to want to have.
Oh, I agree it would be useful, but since you are going to personally be there for the recording (ie. folks were thinking of it as a "manaul recording now") a simple visit to the tuner status page of mythweb or mythtv will tell you that the tuners are free and for how long. I was just giving some pretty easy methods to do it right now. It's a hard choice actually. There is a push to make tools like MythTV "do everything" -- and that's particularly important when you put them in front of people who would find the suggestion of running a video recording program or catting the /dev/video0 as out of their experience. But no program can do everything, even all your a/v needs, and so people prioritize.
_______________________________________________ mythtv-users mailing list [email protected] http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
