On 19.03.2011 16:19, Juergen Lock wrote:
> In article <4d849b3a.6060...@tvdr.de> you write:
>> On 17.03.2011 22:36, Juergen Lock wrote:
>>> In article <4d7caea2.9050...@tvdr.de> you write:
>>>> VDR developer version 1.7.17 is now available at
>>>>      ftp://ftp.tvdr.de/vdr/Developer/vdr-1.7.17.tar.bz2
>>>> A 'diff' against the previous version is available at
>>>>      ftp://ftp.tvdr.de/vdr/Developer/vdr-1.7.16-1.7.17.diff
>>>> ========
>>>> This is a *developer* version. Even though *I* use it in my productive
>>>> environment. I strongly recommend that you only use it under controlled
>>>> conditions and for testing and debugging.
>>>> [...]
>>>> - Fixed detecting frames on channels that broadcast with 50 or 60 fps.
>>>>  This avoids artifacts during fast forward/rewind when replaying 
>>>> recordings from such
>>>>  channels. To fix the index of existing recordings from such channels, 
>>>> just delete the
>>>>  'index' file of the recording and VDR will generate a new one the next 
>>>> time you play it.
>>>>  You should also change the line "F 25" to "F 50" in the 'info' file of 
>>>> that recording.
>>>> [...]
>>> I wonder if I'm chasing a ghost there... am I really the only one
>>> seeing this?  I can't get this index rebuilding to work regardless
>>> if I try it with old or new recordings, if I mv away the original
>>> index file that was created with a recording I always get totally
>>> different index files rebuilt (checked with hexdump/cmp -l) that
>>> cause playbacks (via xineliboutput) to look quite corrupted immediately
>>> and make vdr-sxfe hang at eof too.
>>>  This is vdr 1.7.17, xineliboutput is a 1.0.90s20110308.2305 checkout,
>>> FreeBSD 8.2/amd64, using these ports:
>>>     http://people.freebsd.org/~nox/dvb/vdr-20110317a.shar
>>> (originally noticed with recordings from arte hd on 19.2E, but also
>>> reproduced with new short sd recordings, even from dvb-t.)
>> I just made a recording from "arte HD" with VDR 1.7.17 and everything worked 
>> fine.
>> It played correctly (on a TT-S2 6400 prototype), the current and total
>> times displayed by the progress display were correct and I was able to
>> place and move an editing mark with the picture getting updated just
>> fine.
> So it also works when you stop vdr, mv the recording's index
> file away and then let vdr regenerate it?

Yes, it does.

>  Could this be an amd64/x86_64 issue?

Maybe, I don't know.


vdr mailing list

Reply via email to