Am 22.12.2009 23:59, schrieb Steffen Barszus:
> Ian Bates schrieb:
>> On 22 Dec 2009, at 21:36, Ian Bates wrote:
>> If a timer is currently recording, or a recording would start within the
>> next 30 minutes (default for the "Min. event timeout" setup
>> parameter), and
>> the user insists in shutting down now, the first and second parameter
>> will
>> correspond to a time that is "Min. event timeout" minutes in the future.
>> Before the shutdown program is called, the user will be prompted to
>> inform
>> him that the system is about to shut down. If any remote control key is
>> pressed while this prompt is visible, the shutdown will be cancelled (and
>> tried again later). The shutdown prompt will be displayed for 5
>> minutes, which
>> should be enough time for the user to react.
> So its really a "feature" - Whats the use case for this - except for the
> surprise ? Should a shutdown script try to  "fix" that  ?

There are several cases:
1. Timer more than 30min in the future
- no problem with that.

2. Timer less than 30min in the future
- In that case, the critical question is whether VDR can complete a
whole shutdown within that time. Worst case may be that VDR will never
wake up on its own, because VDR is still shutting down at the wakeup time.

3. Timer is running
- What time should be the best time to wake up? The internal functions
of VDR currently cannot even determine the next timer, only the first
(running) timer.

Other concerns: If you force shutdown to do maintenance, you might be
surprised by a waking up VDR five minutes later. (You probably just
forgot to unplug power, right?)

The current solution was a compromise that was realizable with not too
much effort. The 30mins were simply long enough and a better value than
never to wake up at all.

>From today's point of view, I would probably prefer a solution that
wakes up at the next timer that is more than 30min in the future,
however this requires a better GetNextActiveTimer function.



vdr mailing list

Reply via email to