Re: [vdr] [Fwd: Re: let vdr ignore non vdr directories ?]
On 15.04.2009 08:24, Steffen Barszus wrote: ...On the other hand i think what vdr does is a bad idea and unnecessary. period. Still I support the opinion that vdr should not silently delete files it does not know. vdr is not deleting files it does not know. Its only deleting empty directories in its video directories. From the VDR/INSTALL file: Note that you should not copy any non-VDR files into the /videoX directories, since this might cause a lot of unnecessary disk access when VDR cleans up those directories and there is a large number of files and/or subdirectories in there. The video directory is VDR's own space, there shall be nothing else in there. If the user puts anything non-VDR related into it (even by mistake), it's their fault. Klaus ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] [Fwd: Re: let vdr ignore non vdr directories ?]
On 04/15/09 08:57, Steffen Barszus wrote: Klaus Schmidinger schrieb: On 15.04.2009 08:24, Steffen Barszus wrote: ...On the other hand i think what vdr does is a bad idea and unnecessary. period. Still I support the opinion that vdr should not silently delete files it does not know. vdr is not deleting files it does not know. Its only deleting empty directories in its video directories. From the VDR/INSTALL file: Note that you should not copy any non-VDR files into the /videoX directories, since this might cause a lot of unnecessary disk access when VDR cleans up those directories and there is a large number of files and/or subdirectories in there. The video directory is VDR's own space, there shall be nothing else in there. If the user puts anything non-VDR related into it (even by mistake), it's their fault. Klaus I know that and what i did - and this might not be suggested (i'm mostly happy user since 7 years now). My question was: Why ? It should not be necessary for vdr to check at all second (or third) harddisk. Going into directory hierarchy at disk one should be good enough. I could understand if vdr would blend into one structure directories/files on all harddisk without the symlinking - but fixing things like that needs to be done manually. So why not drop this checking ? What you expect to gain from checking directories not reachable symlinked from video.00 ? Its not only my use case - but also why vdr should waste time/cpu cycles to do that without gaining something. I am not going to touch this multi-directory stuff - except for removing it from VDR altogether. I was never happy with this and deeply regret ever letting me talk into implementing this... Klaus ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] [Announce] xxv-1.3 - Feature release (1.4 rc)
Hello, The xxv project team announce this feature release of xxv. xxv-1.3 is a release candidate of our next major release for XXV the Xtreme eXtension for VDR,its containing a large number of bug fixes and enhancements and more. Major changes are : -- * Support multiple video disk recorder * New module to manage keywords within recordings * New import module for XML-TV sources and template for scheme based programs. * and many more Hello Andreas, what about the useless, not working, feature Medienliste? Will this removed or fixed before the final xxv-1.4 will be released? I am tryed to contact Poetter, but didn't get any reply from him :( Cheers Joerg -- Regards Gentoo Developer Joerg Bornkessel hd_bru...@gentoo.org ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
