Re: [vdr] What about vdr-1.6.1?
Matthias Schwarzottz...@gentoo.org schrieb am 28.06.2009 um 21:55: On Samstag, 27. Juni 2009, Udo Richter wrote: On 25.06.2009 21:55, Ville Skyttä wrote: Hmmm, this could also be a great opportunity: Why not nominate someone as the official maintainer of the 1.6 stable branch? Someone who collects or back-ports fixes and smaller enhancements to the 1.6 branch, and does minor releases based on community feedback? Yes, please! Udo, are you volunteering? ;) Thanks for the confidence in me, but actually, I would prefer not to. I already don't have enough spare time to keep up with my existing projects. And I wanted to focus on moving towards 1.7.x, which is not feature-complete from my point of view now. This doesn't mean that I wouldn't help out in keeping 1.6.x up to date. But I simply cannot promise to have the necessary time. 1.6.x stable should be maintained by someone who really uses it in the future, to keep an eye on stability, and who has at least the time to keep tings from stalling for months. Well, I am not keen on doing this, but to get some progress I at least did upload my git tree based on vdr-1.6.0-2 version of git://vdr.gekrumbel.de/vdr.git to github: http://github.com/zzam/vdr/tree/stable git://github.com/zzam/vdr.git Branch stable It contains up to now only my three patches I already posted in this thread. Regards Matthias Well, I don't know if this is the right way and Klaus probably won't like it. Maybe we should wait, until Klaus is back from his holidays, so that he can participate in this discussion. Regards, Joachim ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] What about vdr-1.6.1?
Well, I am not keen on doing this, but to get some progress I at least did upload my git tree based on vdr-1.6.0-2 version of git://vdr.gekrumbel.de/vdr.git to github: http://github.com/zzam/vdr/tree/stable git://github.com/zzam/vdr.git Branch stable It contains up to now only my three patches I already posted in this thread. Regards Matthias By the way, I think http://projects.vdr-developer.org/ would a great place for a vdr-1.6.? git tree, as there is already the vdr-1.7.? development git tree. ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] What about vdr-1.6.1?
Hi Joachim, Am 29.06.2009 09:49, schrieb J.W.: Well, I am not keen on doing this, but to get some progress I at least did upload my git tree based on vdr-1.6.0-2 version of git://vdr.gekrumbel.de/vdr.git to github: http://github.com/zzam/vdr/tree/stable git://github.com/zzam/vdr.git Branch stable It contains up to now only my three patches I already posted in this thread. Regards Matthias By the way, I think http://projects.vdr-developer.org/ would a great place for a vdr-1.6.? git tree, as there is already the vdr-1.7.? development git tree. I think you are mixing things up. There is no official vdr-git tree. Those git-trees above were created by contributors or users for the ease of developement. - jan ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] What about vdr-1.6.1?
Jan Williesj...@willies.info schrieb am 29.06.2009 um 09:52: Hi Joachim, Am 29.06.2009 09:49, schrieb J.W.: Well, I am not keen on doing this, but to get some progress I at least did upload my git tree based on vdr-1.6.0-2 version of git://vdr.gekrumbel.de/vdr.git to github: http://github.com/zzam/vdr/tree/stable git://github.com/zzam/vdr.git Branch stable It contains up to now only my three patches I already posted in this thread. Regards Matthias By the way, I think http://projects.vdr-developer.org/ would a great place for a vdr-1.6.? git tree, as there is already the vdr-1.7.? development git tree. I think you are mixing things up. There is no official vdr-git tree. Those git-trees above were created by contributors or users for the ease of developement. - jan No, this was clear to me. But as we discuss to shift the maintaining of the stable vdr version to the users or at leat to someone else than Klaus, I think http://projects.vdr-developer.org/ would be exactly the right place. Regards, Joachim ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] What about vdr-1.6.1?
On Samstag, 27. Juni 2009, Udo Richter wrote: On 25.06.2009 21:55, Ville Skyttä wrote: Hmmm, this could also be a great opportunity: Why not nominate someone as the official maintainer of the 1.6 stable branch? Someone who collects or back-ports fixes and smaller enhancements to the 1.6 branch, and does minor releases based on community feedback? Yes, please! Udo, are you volunteering? ;) Thanks for the confidence in me, but actually, I would prefer not to. I already don't have enough spare time to keep up with my existing projects. And I wanted to focus on moving towards 1.7.x, which is not feature-complete from my point of view now. This doesn't mean that I wouldn't help out in keeping 1.6.x up to date. But I simply cannot promise to have the necessary time. 1.6.x stable should be maintained by someone who really uses it in the future, to keep an eye on stability, and who has at least the time to keep tings from stalling for months. Well, I am not keen on doing this, but to get some progress I at least did upload my git tree based on vdr-1.6.0-2 version of git://vdr.gekrumbel.de/vdr.git to github: http://github.com/zzam/vdr/tree/stable git://github.com/zzam/vdr.git Branch stable It contains up to now only my three patches I already posted in this thread. Regards Matthias ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] What about vdr-1.6.1?
On 25.06.2009 21:55, Ville Skyttä wrote: Hmmm, this could also be a great opportunity: Why not nominate someone as the official maintainer of the 1.6 stable branch? Someone who collects or back-ports fixes and smaller enhancements to the 1.6 branch, and does minor releases based on community feedback? Yes, please! Udo, are you volunteering? ;) Thanks for the confidence in me, but actually, I would prefer not to. I already don't have enough spare time to keep up with my existing projects. And I wanted to focus on moving towards 1.7.x, which is not feature-complete from my point of view now. This doesn't mean that I wouldn't help out in keeping 1.6.x up to date. But I simply cannot promise to have the necessary time. 1.6.x stable should be maintained by someone who really uses it in the future, to keep an eye on stability, and who has at least the time to keep tings from stalling for months. Cheers, Udo ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] What about vdr-1.6.1?
On Sunday 21 June 2009, Udo Richter wrote: On 21.06.2009 17:08, Klaus Schmidinger wrote: On 17.06.2009 19:03, J.W. wrote: I thought you could just release vdr-1.6.1 with the patches you have already published (maybe with additional dvb_api patch) . Are there more bugfixes planed? I released VDR 1.6.0 only because several people wanted to have a stable release just before switching to the DVB-S2 API. Sure, I could release a 1.6.1 now, but that would be exactly the same as 1.6.0 plus the two patches 1.6.0-1 and 1.6.0-2. But would that actually be a big help? There's already quite some backporting of version 1.7.x stuff going on... I guess I'm going to concentrate entirely on version 1.7.x. Hmmm, this could also be a great opportunity: Why not nominate someone as the official maintainer of the 1.6 stable branch? Someone who collects or back-ports fixes and smaller enhancements to the 1.6 branch, and does minor releases based on community feedback? Yes, please! Udo, are you volunteering? ;) ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] What about vdr-1.6.1?
Am 25.06.2009 21:55, schrieb Ville Skyttä: On Sunday 21 June 2009, Udo Richter wrote: On 21.06.2009 17:08, Klaus Schmidinger wrote: On 17.06.2009 19:03, J.W. wrote: I thought you could just release vdr-1.6.1 with the patches you have already published (maybe with additional dvb_api patch) . Are there more bugfixes planed? I released VDR 1.6.0 only because several people wanted to have a stable release just before switching to the DVB-S2 API. Sure, I could release a 1.6.1 now, but that would be exactly the same as 1.6.0 plus the two patches 1.6.0-1 and 1.6.0-2. But would that actually be a big help? There's already quite some backporting of version 1.7.x stuff going on... I guess I'm going to concentrate entirely on version 1.7.x. Hmmm, this could also be a great opportunity: Why not nominate someone as the official maintainer of the 1.6 stable branch? Someone who collects or back-ports fixes and smaller enhancements to the 1.6 branch, and does minor releases based on community feedback? Yes, please! Udo, are you volunteering? ;) Seconded. - jan ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] What about vdr-1.6.1?
On 17.06.2009 19:03, J.W. wrote: I thought you could just release vdr-1.6.1 with the patches you have already published (maybe with additional dvb_api patch) . Are there more bugfixes planed? I released VDR 1.6.0 only because several people wanted to have a stable release just before switching to the DVB-S2 API. Sure, I could release a 1.6.1 now, but that would be exactly the same as 1.6.0 plus the two patches 1.6.0-1 and 1.6.0-2. But would that actually be a big help? There's already quite some backporting of version 1.7.x stuff going on... I guess I'm going to concentrate entirely on version 1.7.x. BTW: I'll be on vacation from next thursday, so don't expect anything new in the next couple of weeks ;-) Klaus 2009/6/17 Klaus Schmidinger klaus.schmidin...@cadsoft.de mailto:klaus.schmidin...@cadsoft.de On 06/16/09 10:30, Joachim Welker wrote: Hi Klaus, I see you are very busy in developing the new vdr-1.7.* (thanks for your great work !). But what about stable vdr-1.6.0? You released two patches which should result in version vdr-1.6.1. AFAIR there were no complaints about these patches, so I think it's save to release vdr-1.6.1 in order to rule off the last stable version. I'm dedicating all my spare time to the 1.7.x development, so I'm afraid I just can't work on a 1.6.1. Klaus ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] What about vdr-1.6.1?
On 21.06.2009 17:08, Klaus Schmidinger wrote: On 17.06.2009 19:03, J.W. wrote: I thought you could just release vdr-1.6.1 with the patches you have already published (maybe with additional dvb_api patch) . Are there more bugfixes planed? I released VDR 1.6.0 only because several people wanted to have a stable release just before switching to the DVB-S2 API. Sure, I could release a 1.6.1 now, but that would be exactly the same as 1.6.0 plus the two patches 1.6.0-1 and 1.6.0-2. But would that actually be a big help? There's already quite some backporting of version 1.7.x stuff going on... I guess I'm going to concentrate entirely on version 1.7.x. Hmmm, this could also be a great opportunity: Why not nominate someone as the official maintainer of the 1.6 stable branch? Someone who collects or back-ports fixes and smaller enhancements to the 1.6 branch, and does minor releases based on community feedback? Of course this should be limited to small changes, and should not include patches that aren't even in the 1.7 line, to avoid splitting up the development. We don't want to end with two feature-incompatible versions of VDR. But there are enough small changes and enhancements in 1.7 that could also be ported to 1.6 without breaking stability and compatibility. This would also be a small but fine step towards a more community-driven development of VDR, and a good test whether something like this would work for VDR development in general. Cheers, Udo ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] What about vdr-1.6.1?
On 06/16/09 10:30, Joachim Welker wrote: Hi Klaus, I see you are very busy in developing the new vdr-1.7.* (thanks for your great work !). But what about stable vdr-1.6.0? You released two patches which should result in version vdr-1.6.1. AFAIR there were no complaints about these patches, so I think it's save to release vdr-1.6.1 in order to rule off the last stable version. I'm dedicating all my spare time to the 1.7.x development, so I'm afraid I just can't work on a 1.6.1. Klaus ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] What about vdr-1.6.1?
I thought you could just release vdr-1.6.1 with the patches you have already published (maybe with additional dvb_api patch) . Are there more bugfixes planed? 2009/6/17 Klaus Schmidinger klaus.schmidin...@cadsoft.de On 06/16/09 10:30, Joachim Welker wrote: Hi Klaus, I see you are very busy in developing the new vdr-1.7.* (thanks for your great work !). But what about stable vdr-1.6.0? You released two patches which should result in version vdr-1.6.1. AFAIR there were no complaints about these patches, so I think it's save to release vdr-1.6.1 in order to rule off the last stable version. I'm dedicating all my spare time to the 1.7.x development, so I'm afraid I just can't work on a 1.6.1. Klaus ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
[vdr] What about vdr-1.6.1?
Hi Klaus, I see you are very busy in developing the new vdr-1.7.* (thanks for your great work !). But what about stable vdr-1.6.0? You released two patches which should result in version vdr-1.6.1. AFAIR there were no complaints about these patches, so I think it's save to release vdr-1.6.1 in order to rule off the last stable version. Regards, Joachim ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] What about vdr-1.6.1?
On Dienstag, 16. Juni 2009, Joachim Welker wrote:
Hi Klaus,
I see you are very busy in developing the new vdr-1.7.* (thanks for your
great work !). But what about stable vdr-1.6.0? You released two patches
which should result in version vdr-1.6.1. AFAIR there were no complaints
about these patches, so I think it's save to release vdr-1.6.1 in order to
rule off the last stable version.
Well, if the goal is to release a vdr-1.6.1 version,
I suggest to first collect further patches needed to compile it on recent
systems:
* compiling with gcc-4.4 and glibc-2.10: fixing some variable const issues and
some other warnings
* compiling against linux-headers with s2api (api version 5)
The gentoo versions of these patches are attached.
The gcc-4.4 patch is based on Ludwig Nussels version plus improvments of
Klaus. The last const_cast is replaced by using the fileName member of
cRecording as cRecordings is a friend class.
I don't know if more fixes are floating around that need to be applied.
Regards
Matthias
diff --git a/recording.c b/recording.c
--- a/recording.c
+++ b/recording.c
@@ -509,8 +509,8 @@ cRecording::cRecording(cTimer *Timer, const cEvent *Event)
Utf8Strn0Cpy(SubtitleBuffer, Subtitle, MAX_SUBTITLE_LENGTH);
Subtitle = SubtitleBuffer;
}
- char *macroTITLE = strstr(Timer-File(), TIMERMACRO_TITLE);
- char *macroEPISODE = strstr(Timer-File(), TIMERMACRO_EPISODE);
+ const char *macroTITLE = strstr(Timer-File(), TIMERMACRO_TITLE);
+ const char *macroEPISODE = strstr(Timer-File(), TIMERMACRO_EPISODE);
if (macroTITLE || macroEPISODE) {
name = strdup(Timer-File());
name = strreplace(name, TIMERMACRO_TITLE, Title);
@@ -551,7 +551,7 @@ cRecording::cRecording(const char *FileName)
sortBuffer = NULL;
fileName = strdup(FileName);
FileName += strlen(VideoDirectory) + 1;
- char *p = strrchr(FileName, '/');
+ const char *p = strrchr(FileName, '/');
name = NULL;
info = new cRecordingInfo;
@@ -1022,7 +1022,7 @@ void cRecordings::DelByName(const char *FileName)
if (recording) {
cThreadLock DeletedRecordingsLock(DeletedRecordings);
Del(recording, false);
- char *ext = strrchr(recording-FileName(), '.');
+ char *ext = strrchr(recording-fileName, '.');
if (ext) {
strncpy(ext, DELEXT, strlen(ext));
recording-fileSizeMB = DirSizeMB(recording-FileName());
diff --git a/svdrp.c b/svdrp.c
--- a/svdrp.c
+++ b/svdrp.c
@@ -736,7 +736,7 @@ void cSVDRP::CmdGRAB(const char *Option)
char *strtok_next;
FileName = strtok_r(p, delim, strtok_next);
// image type:
- char *Extension = strrchr(FileName, '.');
+ const char *Extension = strrchr(FileName, '.');
if (Extension) {
if (strcasecmp(Extension, .jpg) == 0 || strcasecmp(Extension, .jpeg) == 0)
Jpeg = true;
@@ -795,16 +795,17 @@ void cSVDRP::CmdGRAB(const char *Option)
char RealFileName[PATH_MAX];
if (FileName) {
if (grabImageDir) {
- cString s;
- char *slash = strrchr(FileName, '/');
+ cString s(FileName);
+ FileName = s;
+ const char *slash = strrchr(FileName, '/');
if (!slash) {
s = AddDirectory(grabImageDir, FileName);
FileName = s;
}
slash = strrchr(FileName, '/'); // there definitely is one
- *slash = 0;
- char *r = realpath(FileName, RealFileName);
- *slash = '/';
+ cString t(s);
+ t.Truncate(slash - FileName);
+ char *r = realpath(t, RealFileName);
if (!r) {
LOG_ERROR_STR(FileName);
Reply(501, Invalid file name \%s\, FileName);
diff --git a/channels.c b/channels.c
--- a/channels.c
+++ b/channels.c
@@ -574,7 +574,7 @@ void cChannel::SetLinkChannels(cLinkChannels *LinkChannels)
}
else
q += sprintf(q, none);
- dsyslog(buffer);
+ dsyslog(%s, buffer);
}
void cChannel::SetRefChannel(cChannel *RefChannel)
diff --git a/device.c b/device.c
--- a/device.c
+++ b/device.c
@@ -529,7 +529,7 @@ eVideoSystem cDevice::GetVideoSystem(void)
return vsPAL;
}
-//#define PRINTPIDS(s) { char b[500]; char *q = b; q += sprintf(q, %d %s , CardIndex(), s); for (int i = 0; i MAXPIDHANDLES; i++) q += sprintf(q, %s%4d %d, i == ptOther ? * : , pidHandles[i].pid, pidHandles[i].used); dsyslog(b); }
+//#define PRINTPIDS(s) { char b[500]; char *q = b; q += sprintf(q, %d %s , CardIndex(), s); for (int i = 0; i MAXPIDHANDLES; i++) q += sprintf(q, %s%4d %d, i == ptOther ? * : , pidHandles[i].pid, pidHandles[i].used); dsyslog(%s, b); }
#define PRINTPIDS(s)
bool cDevice::HasPid(int Pid) const
diff --git a/pat.c b/pat.c
--- a/pat.c
+++ b/pat.c
@@ -144,7 +144,7 @@ void cCaDescriptors::AddCaDescriptor(SI::CaDescriptor *d, bool Stream)
q += sprintf(q, CAM: %04X %5d %5d %04X %d -, source, transponder, serviceId, d-getCaType(), Stream);
for (int i = 0; i nca-Length(); i++)
Re: [vdr] What about vdr-1.6.1?
On Dienstag, 16. Juni 2009, VDR User wrote: The patch vdr-dvb-api-5-is-fine.diff is not a proper fix iirc. Ok, so where is the problem, and how should a proper fix look like? Regards Matthias ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
