On 01/01/2013 09:52 PM, Lars Hanisch wrote:
[...]
I must confess that normally threads at a forum are easier to read and
understand as mailing list threads in any
mail-archive. First you have to found such an archive (or have to know that
something like that even exists) and then
it's complic
On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Christopher Reimer
wrote:
> I couldn't realize that there are so many non-German VDR users.
On one hand I guess I understand considering Germany is VDR's
birthplace and has strong support there. But on the other hand, if VDR
is so popular with germans, why wouldn'
I couldn't realize that there are so many non-German VDR users.
I personally don't like to write English. Not because I hate the
language, more because I'm worried to do something wrong (grammer,
tenses etc.)
Christopher
___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxt
Am 02.01.2013 19:19, schrieb Vidar Tyldum:
> Den 02.01.2013 15:54, skrev Morfsta:
>> Perhaps a sticky at the top of the forum discussing and encouraging
>> the use of English for non-German speaking users would help and giving
>> some guidance on the best way to approach it, so as to avoid flames.
Den 02.01.2013 15:54, skrev Morfsta:
> Perhaps a sticky at the top of the forum discussing and encouraging
> the use of English for non-German speaking users would help and giving
> some guidance on the best way to approach it, so as to avoid flames.
Yes, please! Or just "It's OK to post in Englis
On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 8:52 PM, Lars Hanisch wrote:
> This is an invitation: Please create more posts in english at vdr-portal! If
> a critical mass is passed it will be
> easier for the ones coming past us. Sure there's only a small "international"
> part, but it is there. And of course there
Am 01.01.2013 13:40, schrieb Luca Olivetti:
> Al 30/12/12 01:08, En/na Christopher Reimer ha escrit:
>
>>
>> I don't consider the mailinglist as "central spot of developement".
>> Here I'm forced to speak English. Almost all VDR Users are German. And
>> in VDR-Portal I reach the critical mass. Wit
Al 30/12/12 01:08, En/na Christopher Reimer ha escrit:
>
> I don't consider the mailinglist as "central spot of developement".
> Here I'm forced to speak English. Almost all VDR Users are German. And
> in VDR-Portal I reach the critical mass. With the addition that I am
> allowed to speak my nati
On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 6:54 AM, fnu wrote:
> Not only my friends, e.g. one guy of an international customer, a US citizen
> living in Germany since 10-15 years, is not willing to talk in german with
> us. Just another example, but even our famous foreign workers from all over
> Europe do better h
On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 12:35 AM, Klaus Schmidinger
wrote:
>> It would be nice to hear what Klaus prefers as the main development
>> channel
>> (notice: *main* development channel, not the only channel).
>
> Well, I always considered the VDR mailing list to be the main development
> channel. But w
> von Klaus Schmidinger
> But with the recent "shitstorm" I'm having second thoughts...
Hmm, I had also read shitstorms, this does have a different quality. I would
also take it positiv, nobody is questioning your execellent work, in
contrary, a lot of do take part of it and are interessted in. So
> by VDR User
> but I guess your friends disagree.
Not only my friends, e.g. one guy of an international customer, a US citizen
living in Germany since 10-15 years, is not willing to talk in german with
us. Just another example, but even our famous foreign workers from all over
Europe do better h
Den 31.12.2012 09:35, skrev Klaus Schmidinger:
> Well, I always considered the VDR mailing list to be the main development
> channel. But with the recent "shitstorm" I'm having second thoughts...
Take it as a compliment.
It just goes to show how many have come to rely on VDR and that there is an
On 31.12.2012 09:29, Vidar Tyldum wrote:
...
It would be nice to hear what Klaus prefers as the main development channel
(notice: *main* development channel, not the only channel).
Well, I always considered the VDR mailing list to be the main development
channel. But with the recent "shitstorm"
31.12.2012 00:54, fnu:
>> As good as vdrportal is as a VDR resource, the language barrier _is_ a
> problem for english speakers.
>
> Same with this mailing list for german speakers ... and now?
English isn't just for the British and Americans. I realize that if I start
a VDR forum/mailing-list an
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 3:54 PM, fnu wrote:
>> As good as vdrportal is as a VDR resource, the language barrier _is_ a
> problem for english speakers.
>
> Same with this mailing list for german speakers ... and now?
I don't recall any german speakers ever expressing a problem that this
mailing lis
> As good as vdrportal is as a VDR resource, the language barrier _is_ a
problem for english speakers.
Same with this mailing list for german speakers ... and now?
> or feeling like a welcome visitor/member
A little tale, if I'm in the US, I have to speak english all time. If my US
friends do vi
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 4:26 AM, fnu wrote:
>> Why are the majority of the users German - and why does it stay that way?
> Is it for the greater benefit of VDR?
>
> This is not the fault of the german users, VDR is historically a "german
> speaking project", initiated by a german guy, used by the
Am 30.12.2012 01:08, schrieb Christopher Reimer:
2012/12/29 Udo Richter :
Even if there was
an thread in vdr-portal, I did miss it, and there was no word of it in
the mailing list, which I always considered to be the central spot of
development.
Really? http://linuxtv.org/pipermail/vdr/2012-No
> von Vidar Tyldum
> Why are the majority of the users German - and why does it stay that way?
Is it for the greater benefit of VDR?
This is not the fault of the german users, VDR is historically a "german
speaking project", initiated by a german guy, used by the biggest VDR
community, german, au
Nice 33%!!
Then tell me why was there no answer on the mailinglist thread.
No answer = everything is ok --> send patch to Klaus
2012/12/30 Gerald Dachs :
> Am 30.12.2012 01:08, schrieb Christopher Reimer:
>
>> I don't consider the mailinglist as "central spot of developement". Here
>> I'm forced
Am 30.12.2012 01:08, schrieb Christopher Reimer:
I don't consider the mailinglist as "central spot of developement".
Here I'm forced to speak English. Almost all VDR Users are German. And
in VDR-Portal I reach the critical mass. With the addition that I am
allowed to speak my native language.
W
30.12.2012 01:08, Christopher Reimer:
> Here I'm forced to speak English. Almost all VDR Users are German. And
> in VDR-Portal I reach the critical mass. With the addition that I am
> allowed to speak my native language.
Okay, now I am really derailing this thread - but think a bit about that
one.
2012/12/30 fnu :
> And as far as I remember nobody did complain about the old Makefile
> structur, and yes I mean nobody, because the two now known just changed it
> w/o warning. Do what ever you need to do, I appriciate it, but remind always
> some continuity for all others in the VDR universe.
O
On Saturday 29 December 2012 - 18:39:05, fnu wrote:
> .. or maybe an in between stable release called V1.8 and go ahead with these
> important changes in V1.9 ... just a thought ...
+1
Gero
___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cg
> von Christopher Reimer
> Yes, I am happy with the new makefiles.
I'm glad to hear this, but what about all the other developers and users?
Developer version back and forth, VDR 1.7.xx has become silently a somewhat
stable version over the years, due to it's HDTV capability. Becoming an
officia
> OK. 50 plugins doesn't sound impossible to deal with. But they have to
> be in one place, as Manuel mentioned.
> Name these 50 unmaintained plugins and then we can check when and how
> they'll be moved to vdr-developer.org.
there is a small list, ~30 plugins on
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bu
2012/12/29 Udo Richter :
Even if there was
> an thread in vdr-portal, I did miss it, and there was no word of it in
> the mailing list, which I always considered to be the central spot of
> development.
Really? http://linuxtv.org/pipermail/vdr/2012-November/026813.html
There was NO answer at all.
Am 28.12.2012 16:38, schrieb Klaus Schmidinger:
> So should we go back to the Makefiles of version 1.7.33 and declare this
> area of the program source "untouchable" forever?
Beside all the current whining (and *I* don't exclude myself from that),
it is nevertheless a step in the right direction.
> von Klaus Schmidinger
> From what I have seen in this thread lately, I don't think the outcry
would have been any less then...
You're maybe right, but I'm not sure.
Because now, everybody does know, these changes will happen soon, no Plugin
for V2.1 w/o rework.
But V2.1 is near future, so ti
On 29.12.2012 17:52, fnu wrote:
von Manuel Reimer
The changes in 1.7.34 are a big change into the right direction!
FullAck, but really at that time of 1.7.xx? At this time where 1.7.xx is
more less saddled by all HDTV users?
Many new festures have been postponed after V2 release. Some of them
> von Manuel Reimer
> The changes in 1.7.34 are a big change into the right direction!
FullAck, but really at that time of 1.7.xx? At this time where 1.7.xx is
more less saddled by all HDTV users?
Many new festures have been postponed after V2 release. Some of them
wouldn't have this significant
On 12/29/2012 01:07 PM, Manuel Reimer wrote:
[..]
In context of a plugin, VDR should be something like a "backend
library". It has to be installed, but the plugin should be compilable
from *everywhere* as long as the "backend library" is there.
This is why pkg-config was invented and this is how
On 12/29/2012 01:14 PM, Helmut Auer wrote:
If there is really a need for that special unsupported plugin, then
the best way
to go would be that at least one of all those distributions, who
currently
maintains that plugin, "republishes" it somewhere (AFAIR
projects.vdr-developer.org was invented
Helmut Auer wrote:
We are talking about > 100 Plugins. Maybe we can drop the half of these but > 50
will be remaining ...
No problem. Let's start a discussion about this in a separate thread. I bet that
about 20 more plugins aren't worth the effort and so about 30 plugins will be
left. Portin
OK. 50 plugins doesn't sound impossible to deal with. But they have to
be in one place, as Manuel mentioned.
Name these 50 unmaintained plugins and then we can check when and how
they'll be moved to vdr-developer.org.
Christopher
2012/12/29 Helmut Auer :
>>
>> If there is really a need for that
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
Never in my wildest dreams would I have expected such an outrage about this
change, which was entirely intended to make things simpler in the future.
But if this is not what people want, then let's just stick with the old
Makefiles and declare version 1.7.34 a complete an
If there is really a need for that special unsupported plugin, then the best way
to go would be that at least one of all those distributions, who currently
maintains that plugin, "republishes" it somewhere (AFAIR
projects.vdr-developer.org was invented for that?).
First step could be to apply al
Udo Richter wrote:
Being actively developed and being needed are two different things. I wouldn't
want to drop all the plugins that aren't under active development any more, as
this would probably be true for 2/3 of my plugins.
If there is really a need for that special unsupported plugin, then
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 11:19 AM, fnu wrote:
>> Let's not waste more mailing list space with this nonsense.
>
> I got it already, you're way of installation and usage of VDR is the only
> valid, all others are stupid. Your statements here are the one and only
> truth, even so only you are allowed
> Let's not waste more mailing list space with this nonsense.
I got it already, you're way of installation and usage of VDR is the only
valid, all others are stupid. Your statements here are the one and only
truth, even so only you are allowed to make conclusions. Yes man, you're the
very last kni
Am 28.12.2012 16:38, schrieb Klaus Schmidinger:
> So should we go back to the Makefiles of version 1.7.33 and declare this
> area of the program source "untouchable" forever?
> Maybe this would be the easiest solution, and I wouldn't get bashed, offended
> and insulted that much any more.
> Never i
Am 28.12.2012 16:38, schrieb Klaus Schmidinger:
So should we go back to the Makefiles of version 1.7.33 and declare this
area of the program source "untouchable" forever?
+1
Gerald
!DSPAM:50ddc50a174441059718148!
___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.or
On 28.12.2012 16:38, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
On 28.12.2012 14:42, Udo Richter wrote:
Am 28.12.2012 09:29, schrieb Klaus Schmidinger:
On 28.12.2012 00:47, Dominic Evans wrote:
IF YOU BREAK USERSPACE I HATE YOU AND YOU ARE A TERRIBLE PERSON
Not breaking userspace is, of course, the right th
On 28.12.2012 14:42, Udo Richter wrote:
Am 28.12.2012 09:29, schrieb Klaus Schmidinger:
On 28.12.2012 00:47, Dominic Evans wrote:
IF YOU BREAK USERSPACE I HATE YOU AND YOU ARE A TERRIBLE PERSON
Not breaking userspace is, of course, the right thing to do in a *stable*
version of any software
I don't think arguing which userspace is bigger is so important.
I'm rather silent user and use VDR a few years now.
First I compiled it from scratch because there were no other option.
Then I tried to use packages but failed. Packages were outdated, only a
few plugins in repository. No good decr
Am 28.12.2012 14:37, schrieb Klaus Schmidinger:
On 28.12.2012 14:19, Udo Richter wrote:
Plus, any updated plugin (at least any built-in plugin) does no longer
create the *.so.$APIVERSION file, and there's no generic way to do this.
Well, then maybe this works (haven't tested it):
for i in
Am 28.12.2012 09:29, schrieb Klaus Schmidinger:
On 28.12.2012 00:47, Dominic Evans wrote:
IF YOU BREAK USERSPACE I HATE YOU AND YOU ARE A TERRIBLE PERSON
Not breaking userspace is, of course, the right thing to do in a *stable*
version of any software.
In Linux context, it actually means k
On 28.12.2012 14:19, Udo Richter wrote:
Am 28.12.2012 09:28, schrieb Klaus Schmidinger:
Well, if a plugin is no longer actively maintained, it's probably
time to drop it. You know what they say about dead horses ;-).
Being actively developed and being needed are two different things. I wouldn'
Am 28.12.2012 09:28, schrieb Klaus Schmidinger:
Well, if a plugin is no longer actively maintained, it's probably
time to drop it. You know what they say about dead horses ;-).
Being actively developed and being needed are two different things. I
wouldn't want to drop all the plugins that aren
On 28 December 2012 10:07, Gero wrote:
> I guess, most of confusion and frictions comes from the fact, that you use c++
> as programming language, but you don't code c++ and you don't think as a c++-
> developer.
>
> Same - you developed a linux app, but you don't care about linux standards.
>
> *
On 28 December 2012 09:29, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
> IF YOU BREAK USERSPACE I HATE YOU AND YOU ARE A TERRIBLE PERSON
>
> So did *you* (Dominic) just make that up? I'm asking because your
> posting looks just like a direct quotation from Linus, and I have
> a hard time imagining a renowned perso
On Friday 28 December 2012 - 09:29:01, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
> Well, Linus apparently has very strong feelings about this.
> However, nowhere in that posting does it say
>
>IF YOU BREAK USERSPACE I HATE YOU AND YOU ARE A TERRIBLE PERSON
>
I guess, most of confusion and frictions comes fro
On 28.12.2012 00:47, Dominic Evans wrote:
On 27 Dec 2012, at 23:41, fnu mailto:v...@auktion.hostingkunde.de>> wrote:
Linux wouldn't have been that succesfull, if Linus Torvalds would not had an
ear to the needs of others, even business needs ...
A Christmas message from Linus – “IF YOU BREAK
On 28.12.2012 00:43, Helmut Auer wrote:
If I don't accept patches, I'm blamed for slowing down development.
If I do accept a patch that causes a little work to adapt to (but
looks promising in the long run), I'm being offended by being compared
to Louis XIV. I guess you just can't win 'em all...
On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 7:38 PM, fnu wrote:
>> users when there's plenty of evidence that says otherwise.
>
> You did not provide any ... you also just pray your truth ...
This mailing list, the freebsd multimedia mailing list, forums such as
vdr-portal, dvbn, and numerous others, irc channels, e
> users when there's plenty of evidence that says otherwise.
You did not provide any ... you also just pray your truth ...
> It may be hard for you to accept but reality is that VDR has a successful
life way past yavdr and `apt-get install vdr`.
Yes, I know, I have been part of it. I still keep
On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 5:29 PM, fnu wrote:
> I'm not wrong, the users compiling VDR from scratch are far in minority.
> Again I'm not just talking about ready to run ISO images.
You make this claim but the opposite is observed on mailing lists,
forums, and irc. Since you're so convinced, maybe y
> I think fnu is wrong in his assumption that "over 95% of VDR users"
I'm not wrong, the users compiling VDR from scratch are far in minority.
Again I'm not just talking about ready to run ISO images.
There are plenty of silent users working the packages out of Linux' distros
repositories, Debian
On 27.12.2012 16:55, VDR User wrote:
> Matthias Schniedermeyer:
> Pointing out that the last stable release of VDR having an old
> timestamp has nothing to do with people _choosing_ to use the
> developer version, which is warned and well-known to possibly contain
> changes that will cause problems
Matthias Schniedermeyer:
Pointing out that the last stable release of VDR having an old
timestamp has nothing to do with people _choosing_ to use the
developer version, which is warned and well-known to possibly contain
changes that will cause problems for those expecting "stable"
behavior. The adv
Dominic,
good one!
I know, a coin has always two sides, but hack, look where Linux nowadays is
. ^^
Cheers
Frank
Im Auftrag von Dominic Evans
Gesendet: Freitag, 28. Dezember 2012 00:47
An: VDR Mailing List
Betreff: Re: [vdr] [DISCUSSION REQUEST] reintroduce a common make
On 27 Dec 2012, at 23:41, fnu wrote:
Linux wouldn't have been that succesfull, if Linus Torvalds would not had an
ear to the needs of others, even business needs ...
A Christmas message from Linus – “IF YOU BREAK USERSPACE I HATE YOU AND YOU
ARE A TERRIBLE PERSON”
http://article.gmane.org/gman
If I don't accept patches, I'm blamed for slowing down development.
If I do accept a patch that causes a little work to adapt to (but
looks promising in the long run), I'm being offended by being compared
to Louis XIV. I guess you just can't win 'em all...
You're absolutely right here.
The probl
On 27.12.2012 23:40, fnu wrote:
...
But the way of the last changes, in best manner of Louis XIV, ignoring
all other needs around can't be the right way.
All I did was to accept a patch from Christopher Reimer that removed
some redundancy in the Makefiles and would better isolate the plugins
Ma
> Keep in mind, all these changes are occurring in the _developer_ version
of VDR, not stable.
Oh damn, I did not even realize this ... ^^
Nobody really want to use VDR 1.6.0 anymore these days, in Europe we would
not be able to watch HDTV. Facing this fact VDR 1.7.3+ is more than just a
develope
One last question:
Am 27.12.2012 22:21, schrieb VDR User:
And of those users, most don't even install VDR, they simply run it
from the source dir.
So, real VDR user don't need the install Target in the makefile and
distributors, at least me, don't need it too. It seems there must be
another
Am 27.12.2012 22:21, schrieb VDR User:
On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 10:20 AM, fnu wrote:
But don't forget, you don't make a solution liek VDR a success or BBS like
vdr-portal only with a few "make; make install" users. Over 95% of VDR users
are using a distribution.
I completely disagree with you
On 27.12.2012 13:21, VDR User wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 10:20 AM, fnu wrote:
> >> ... there are way too much changes at the moment :)
> >
> > FullAck, but the number of changes are not the issue, it's more the
> > sustainability and the time frame within the changes. Looking to the last 5
>
Am 27.12.2012 19:11, schrieb Helmut Auer:
I'm just glad Linux distribution managers don't build cars - otherwise we would
most
likely be long dead before we find the brake pedal... ;-)
As a distribution manger I have to disagree ;)
All I'm doing now, is to wait til you find a solution which wo
On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 10:20 AM, fnu wrote:
>> ... there are way too much changes at the moment :)
>
> FullAck, but the number of changes are not the issue, it's more the
> sustainability and the time frame within the changes. Looking to the last 5
> versions, each of them do look allmost like a
> ... there are way too much changes at the moment :)
FullAck, but the number of changes are not the issue, it's more the
sustainability and the time frame within the changes. Looking to the last 5
versions, each of them do look allmost like a complete new version. There is
allmost no time for oth
Am 27.12.2012 19:11, schrieb Helmut Auer:
I'm just glad Linux distribution managers don't build cars -
otherwise we would most
likely be long dead before we find the brake pedal... ;-)
As a distribution manger I have to disagree ;)
All I'm doing now, is to wait til you find a solution which wo
I'm just glad Linux distribution managers don't build cars - otherwise we would
most
likely be long dead before we find the brake pedal... ;-)
As a distribution manger I have to disagree ;)
All I'm doing now, is to wait til you find a solution which won't be changed within the next
five days a
On 27.12.2012 17:43, Manuel Reimer wrote:
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
This was more like a general rant about Linux distributions all wanting
there files in different locations.
This is common on most Unix systems. There are common paths where specific
types of files should be placed to. If you
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
This was more like a general rant about Linux distributions all wanting
there files in different locations.
This is common on most Unix systems. There are common paths where specific types
of files should be placed to. If you are used to the common paths, then you'll
On 27.12.2012 17:22, Manuel Reimer wrote:
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
...still considering what to do with the plugin configuration stuff. Currently I
tend to
put a "plgcfg" entry into vdr.pc, since apparently everybody wants this to be
somewhere else.
I'm just glad Linux distribution managers don'
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
...still considering what to do with the plugin configuration stuff. Currently I
tend to
put a "plgcfg" entry into vdr.pc, since apparently everybody wants this to be
somewhere else.
I'm just glad Linux distribution managers don't build cars - otherwise we would
most
like
On 26.12.2012 20:19, Udo Richter wrote:
...
Oh, and by the way, with introducing $(CWD) some previously relative paths got
hard coded, so moving these builds around or accessing them from different
mount points might now be broken. For example, my default lib dir changed from
./PLUGINS/lib to
Hi,
Am 26.12.2012 15:54, schrieb Manuel Reimer:
I think that we should keep the possibility to configure
highlevel plugin
options from a central place like plugins.conf just as
Make.config did up to
VDR-1.7.33.
What is your plan? Do you want to build plugins "the old way"
inside the VDR sourc
I prefer to keep files for a given program together in that programs
tree. Not scatter all over the computer like ms. The only thing for vdr
I move is the recordings because of the space required. All
settings/config files for vdr belong in the vdr directory tree.
On 12/25/2012 1:07 PM, Klaus
I've been doing things with Make.config too, and would like it to be
available again. My plugins usually followed this pattern:
-include $(VDRDIR)/Make.global
-include $(VDRDIR)/Make.config
-include Make.config
so you always had the chance to have optional control without patching
makefiles.
Reinhard Nissl wrote:
I understand that this seems to be a quite simple solution, because in the end,
almost any other configuration option will be converted to either compiler or
linker settings. But it's quite lowlevel and one has to dig through the Makefile
in depth to extract the necessary co
Hi,
Am 26.12.2012 09:53, schrieb Christopher Reimer:
2012/12/25 Klaus Schmidinger :
3.) the file should be included into plugin Makefiles after having set
PLUGIN and VERSION to be able to have some plugin-/version-dependent
configuration.
Agreed.
No. Not agreed.
Just use DEFINES+= in Mak
2012/12/25 Klaus Schmidinger :
>
>> 3.) the file should be included into plugin Makefiles after having set
>> PLUGIN and VERSION to be able to have some plugin-/version-dependent
>> configuration.
>
>
> Agreed.
>
No. Not agreed.
Just use DEFINES+= in Make.config, and if that doesn't work, plugin
On 25.12.2012 20:47, Reinhard Nissl wrote:
Hi,
as mentioned in the VDR-1.7.34 announcement, Make.config is now gone for
plugins.
Make.config gave me the opportunity to control features or behavior of plugins
and VDR at a central location without having the need to adjust each plugin's
Makefi
86 matches
Mail list logo