On 02/09/08 13:53, Anssi Hannula wrote:
> Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
>> On 01/09/08 00:44, Reinhard Nissl wrote:
#vdr
REMOTE=LIRC
LIRC_PUSHFREQ=64 # 1/s
LIRC_REPEATDELAY=250 # ms
LIRC_REPEATFREQ=32 # 1/s
#LIRC_REPEATTIMEOUT=500 # ms
#LIRC_RECONNECTDELAY=3000 # ms
>>
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
> On 01/09/08 00:44, Reinhard Nissl wrote:
>>> #vdr
>>> REMOTE=LIRC
>>> LIRC_PUSHFREQ=64 # 1/s
>>> LIRC_REPEATDELAY=250 # ms
>>> LIRC_REPEATFREQ=32 # 1/s
>>> #LIRC_REPEATTIMEOUT=500 # ms
>>> #LIRC_RECONNECTDELAY=3000 # ms
>>> LIRC_PRIORITYBOOST=1
>
> Isn't there a way to h
On 01/09/08 00:44, Reinhard Nissl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was quite annoyed how I could operate my EPIA MII-6000E using a
> LIRC remote. It was almost not possible to navigate through the
> OSD in a fast way.
>
> The attached patch allows now to define timeouts and frequencies
> for example in Make.co
On Saturday 12 January 2008, Reinhard Nissl wrote:
> Ville Skyttä schrieb:
>
> > Also, somewhat off topic: when running powertop[1] on my VDR box, I see
> > lircd waking up the CPU from idle about 1000 times a second while VDR is
> > connected to it:
> >
> > Top causes for wakeups:
> > 54.3% (988
Hi,
Ville Skyttä schrieb:
>> I think, the LIRC protocol misses a timestamp for each button
>> press. Or an even more favorable solution would be to put the
>> timeout and frequency processing into LIRC and have VDR to
>> process each key as it arrives, just like with the KBD remote.
>
> Would us
On Saturday 12 January 2008, Reinhard Nissl wrote:
> I think, the LIRC protocol misses a timestamp for each button
> press. Or an even more favorable solution would be to put the
> timeout and frequency processing into LIRC and have VDR to
> process each key as it arrives, just like with the KBD r
Hi,
Ludwig Nussel schrieb:
> Since the lirc thread doesn't do anything except waiting for input
> most of the time it should be scheduled quickly anyways. Maybe the
> useless select timeout destroys that advantage somewhat.
I don't think so. In my case (i. e. on my EPIA MII-6000E), there
are a l
Hi,
Nicolas Huillard schrieb:
> An option would be to lower priority of all threads except this one. I
> guess only relative priority within VDR is important.
> You can also raise priority in your init scripts (nice=-N), before
> running VDR. This way every thread will have nice=0 priority, exc
Reinhard Nissl wrote:
> The attached patch allows now to define timeouts and frequencies
> for example in Make.config, so there is no need to patch every
> VDR version. Furthermore, frequencies are now defined in unit 1/s
> instead of the unit ms (which defined the period), making values
> more int
Nicolas Huillard wrote:
> Reinhard Nissl a écrit :
> > Dominique Matz schrieb:
> >
> >> sound very good, but vdr as root do not :-(
> >>
> >> do you think it is possible to use this or something else with an non
> >> root user?
> >
> > Well, only the LIRC_PRIORITYBOOST option requires root privil
Reinhard Nissl a écrit :
> Dominique Matz schrieb:
>
>> sound very good, but vdr as root do not :-(
>>
>> do you think it is possible to use this or something else with an non
>> root user?
>
> Well, only the LIRC_PRIORITYBOOST option requires root privileges
> to work. If you don't have root pri
Hi,
Dominique Matz schrieb:
> sound very good, but vdr as root do not :-(
>
> do you think it is possible to use this or something else with an non
> root user?
Well, only the LIRC_PRIORITYBOOST option requires root privileges
to work. If you don't have root privileges, you'll just get an
error
Hi Reinhard,
sound very good, but vdr as root do not :-(
do you think it is possible to use this or something else with an non
root user?
I think many use vdr with an special non root user, for example all
which use gentoo.
greetings mentox aka dominique
Reinhard Nissl schrieb:
> Hi,
>
> I
13 matches
Mail list logo
