[vdr] Filesystem hierachy standard patch needs review.
Hi Mailinglist, could someone please review the attached patch? It's originally posted by Maniac in this thread -- http://www.vdr-portal.de/board60-linux/board14-betriebssystem/p1054966-vdr-verzeichnisse-nach-filesystem-hierarchy-standard-fhs-richtig-ablegen/#post1054966 The documentation and some Makefile changes are my work. The main code changes are Maniac's work. I hope the code as well as the documentation is ok, so that the patch can be added in the next VDR Version. Thanks, Christopher Reimer vdr_fhs_1.2.diff Description: Binary data ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
[vdr] Crystal Palace channels.conf file
Slightly off topic, am about 6000 miles away, but can someone post an updated Crystal Palace dvb-t/freeview channels.conf file. My slingbox is acting up and, coming from a VDR background, I want to see what the channels.conf is to work out why. (If you're slingbox interested, the BBC Mux is missing half its channels while the slingbox is set to UK, if I set it to Italy, I get all the muxes/channels but no channel order). I will probably use the channels.conf file to work out what the channel mapping is and leave it on. The long term plan is to use vdr-iptv and a script to feed slingbox input into my VDR on this side of the atlantic, just waiting for the slingbox code in xbmc to turn into a standalone program.) ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] Filesystem hierachy standard patch needs review.
Hi, On Friday 06 April 2012 - 15:01:14, Christopher Reimer wrote: I hope the code as well as the documentation is ok, so that the patch can be added in the next VDR Version. The comment (line 8ff) was a good joke on forum discussion thread, but keeping it that way sounds really offending to me. I don't think, its a good choice. kind regards Gero ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] Filesystem hierachy standard patch needs review.
On 06.04.2012 17:06, Gero wrote: Hi, On Friday 06 April 2012 - 15:01:14, Christopher Reimer wrote: I hope the code as well as the documentation is ok, so that the patch can be added in the next VDR Version. The comment (line 8ff) was a good joke on forum discussion thread, but keeping it that way sounds really offending to me. I don't think, its a good choice. But isn't that exactly what happens then? ;-) The files *are* spread all over the place. Besides, who reads the INSTALL file, anyway... ;-) Klaus ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] Filesystem hierachy standard patch needs review.
I think there's one problem left. Doesn't VDR try to create the plugins subdir? VDR runs usually as user. Most distribution maintainer will give VDR write permission for the cache dir and the config dir. But not for the resource dir. To prevent these permission problems I think it's neccessary to change the Makefile from install-dirs: @mkdir -p $(DESTDIR)$(VIDEODIR) @mkdir -p $(DESTDIR)$(CONFDIR) @mkdir -p $(DESTDIR)$(RESDIR) @mkdir -p $(DESTDIR)$(CACHEDIR) to install-dirs: @mkdir -p $(DESTDIR)$(VIDEODIR) @mkdir -p $(DESTDIR)$(CONFDIR)/plugins @mkdir -p $(DESTDIR)$(RESDIR)/plugins @mkdir -p $(DESTDIR)$(CACHEDIR)/plugins or at least install-dirs: @mkdir -p $(DESTDIR)$(VIDEODIR) @mkdir -p $(DESTDIR)$(CONFDIR) @mkdir -p $(DESTDIR)$(RESDIR)/plugins @mkdir -p $(DESTDIR)$(CACHEDIR) ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] Filesystem hierachy standard patch needs review.
On Friday 06 April 2012 - 18:07:55, Klaus Schmidinger wrote: On 06.04.2012 17:06, Gero wrote: The comment (line 8ff) was a good joke on forum discussion thread, but keeping it that way sounds really offending to me. I don't think, its a good choice. But isn't that exactly what happens then? ;-) The files *are* spread all over the place. Besides, who reads the INSTALL file, anyway... ;-) Well, *I* think, that there's a big difference between keeping things in order compared to spreading things all over the place. The one who eats where he shits, surely has a single place for his *IO* - but I neither consider this habit as recommended, nor exemplary. ... but well - after all its just my opinion. kind regards Gero ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] [ANNOUNCE] VDR developer version 1.7.27
In article 4f6f0570.7050...@tvdr.de you write:
VDR developer version 1.7.27 is now available at
ftp://ftp.tvdr.de/vdr/Developer/vdr-1.7.27.tar.bz2
A 'diff' against the previous version is available at
ftp://ftp.tvdr.de/vdr/Developer/vdr-1.7.26-1.7.27.diff
[...]
Hi!
While upgrading from 1.7.22 to 1.7.27 I noticed epg scans on a
single tuner (with xineliboutput in this case) no longer seem to
happen while that tuner is in live view mode, even trying to force
a scan via the osd or via svdrpsend scan no longer does anything.
Am I right this is because eitscan.c cEITScanner::Process does
...
if (!Device-Receiving()) {
...
and device.c cDevice::Receiving's bool arg no longer does anything
i.e. it no longer checks the attached receiver's priorities and thus
returns true even for devices only in live view mode?
And if yes, what would be the proper fix? :)
Thanx!
Juergen
___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] Filesystem hierachy standard patch needs review.
On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Gero geronimo...@gmx.de wrote: Well, *I* think, that there's a big difference between keeping things in order compared to spreading things all over the place. I can't stand when things are installed all over the place. It's too messy and pointless in my opinion. I'm in the habit of simply running VDR from it's source dir and using symlinks. It makes things very easy like archiving working/test sources, changing between versions without any needless 'reinstall'ing, etc. I see no benefit what-so-ever to installing over running VDR from the source dir, unless of course you're using pre-compiled binaries. As far as the patch, is it really necessary to split the files up even further? What is the real benefit? Also, don't different distros use different dir structures, so what's common on some may not be on others? If this is an attempt to standardize something, it's probably best to find a standard that exists across _all_ distros (if this isn't the case here). ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] Filesystem hierachy standard patch needs review.
On Saturday 07 April 2012 - 04:05:16, VDR User wrote: I can't stand when things are installed all over the place. Let's take a quick look at real life: if you need to exchange the tooth belt on your motorcycle - will you perform that task in your living room? if you visit your friend for the first time and you look for a cold beer - will you look in his bedroom? In real life we all spread our things all over the house to keep them in order. The refrigerator will be placed in the kitchen, the car in the garage and your bed will most probably be in your bedroom. If you like to sleep on toilet or shit in your kitchen - I don't mind. For me, people that like to keep their PC in order behave quite natural, there's no need to offend them for thinking different. kind regards Gero ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
