On 03/07/11 14:13, Frank Schmirler wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Mar 2011 13:33:47 +0100, Klaus Schmidinger wrote
>> On 03/07/11 13:23, Frank Schmirler wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 17:15:44 +0100, Klaus Schmidinger wrote
>>>> The problem is that the VPS code in vdr.c avoids devices that are
>>>> currently recording. And since this is a rather complex area,
>>>> I'm not sure if it's too good an idea to change this ;-)
>>>> If you feel like it, you may want to take a look at the code under
>>>>   // Find a device that provides the required transponder:
>>>> in vdr.c. Maybe you can come up with a better solution...
>>> Unless I've missed something, that code does not only ignore priorities but
>>> also the availability of CAMs.
>> We only need the EIT data here, which is not encrypted.
>> So it's sufficient to find a device that provides the
>> raw transponder.
> Ah, I see. I ignored the fact, that at the moment this piece of code is only
> looking for a way to see the VPS start flag for the timer. Still the GetDevice
> call (or something alike) would become necessary when considering to interrupt
> a recording with lower priority. The low priority recording shouldn't be
> interrupted if the VPS recording cannot start later as e.g. the CAM is in use
> by a higher priority recording.

Looks like this is beginning to become "rocket science" again ;-)


vdr mailing list

Reply via email to