[vdr] Re: VDR deletes fresh recordings

[Rainer Zocholl <UseNet-Posting-Nospam-74308-@zocki.toppoint.de>]

Klaus.Schmidinger@cadsoft.de(Klaus Schmidinger)  15.01.05 16:58


>Rainer Zocholl wrote:
>> Klaus.Schmidinger@cadsoft.de(Klaus Schmidinger)  15.01.05 14:51
>>
>>
>>
>>>Rainer Zocholl wrote:
>>>
>>>>VDR seems to have deleted the first recordings, or?
>>>>Why?
>>
>>
>>>Because the directory had the ".del" extension?!
>>
>>
>> How could that have happened?

>Look what I found in the log file you just sent me via PM:

>Jan 14 08:21:15 msi vdr[29270]: timer 132 (272 0700-2345 'ESA') stop
>Jan 14 08:21:58 msi vdr[29270]: confirm: Delete recording?
>Jan 14 08:22:01 msi vdr[29270]: confirmed
>Jan 14 08:22:01 msi vdr[29270]: deleting recording
>/video0/ESA/2005-01-14.07:00.50.07.rec

Yes. That was in the morning!

I had the timer started too early and wanted to delete
the supeflous recording of the "colorbar".
(See the timer 132 (272 0700-2345 'ESA') stop?)
                         ~~~
After that i reprogrammed the timer to restart at 9:00
I wonder why it uses 700...maybe i did not change this really,
beacause it would not really have mattered.




>> If i would have pressed "delete" all recordings would
>> have been gone. (As "timers" and "recording" behaves similiar
>> that could easily happen)

>Right after the delete above you have apparently edited the timer
>and started it again:

Yes.

>Jan 14 08:22:20 msi vdr[29270]: timer 132 activated
>Jan 14 08:22:21 msi vdr[29270]: timer 132 deactivated
>Jan 14 08:22:22 msi vdr[29270]: timer 132 activated
>Jan 14 08:22:24 msi vdr[29270]: editing timer 132
>Jan 14 08:22:30 msi vdr[29270]: switching device 2 to channel 272
>Jan 14 08:22:30 msi vdr[29270]: timer 132 (272 0700-2345 'ESA') start
>Jan 14 08:22:30 msi vdr[29270]: waiting for EPG info...
>Jan 14 08:22:34 msi vdr[29270]: no EPG info available
>Jan 14 08:22:34 msi vdr[29270]: record
>/video0/ESA/2005-01-14.07:00.50.07.rec Jan 14 08:22:34 msi vdr[29270]:
>creating directory /video0/ESA/2005-01-14.07:00.50.07.rec Jan 14
>08:22:34 msi vdr[29270]: recording to
>'/video0/ESA/2005-01-14.07:00.50.07.rec/001.vdr'

>This has created a situation where there are the directories

>   /video0/ESA/2005-01-14.07:00.50.07.del
>   /video1/ESA/2005-01-14.07:00.50.07.rec

>from the previous recording (note that the directory on /video1 is
>still named '.rec'), plus the directory

>   /video0/ESA/2005-01-14.07:00.50.07.rec

>from the new recording, which has links into the
>/video1/ESA/2005-01-14.07:00.50.07.rec directory. 

>At the time you have deleted the first recording there 
>were 5 video files (001.vdr ... 005.vdr). 

No, there can't have been 5 of those 2GB files at that early time.
How?
There was only approx. one for the time 7:00 to 8:30
Link shows that all recordings upto 14:42 were deleted.
That does not fit to the confirmed delete at 8:21!


>As soon as VDR actually removed the
>/video0/ESA/2005-01-14.07:00.50.07.del directory, it also removed
>these file files, since the links pointed to them.


>A solution to this problem might be to also rename the directories
>on other disks when deleting a recording 

Yes, of cause you can't blame the user for this absoletely 
intransparent, unexpectable behavior!

It's very likely to see:
ooop that teimer wys wrong, lets delete the old
recording and setit new.


>- but the again this is just
>one more reason to drop this whole linking stuff altogether...

Em, that problem seems not to be related with the linking.
Linking seems to have protect the other file from beeing deleted too..


>> Too: there was no reason to delete at that time
>> (no reboot or so)
>>
>> Was there too much free?

>VDR removes deleted recordings whenever it seems suitable.

Yep.. but there was no restart, nothing.
Only the timer stops.



>> The links still exists:
>> : replay /video0/ESA/2005-01-14.07:00.50.07.rec
>> : loading /video0/ESA/2005-01-14.07:00.50.07.rec//marks.vdr

>As explained above, these have been created by your _second_
>recording.

Why was that recording going into the same dir?
That can't be a problem of the linking/user.


>> No. It stays simply black.
>> (i would have expected live or a warning "video not present yet" )

>Ok, then I guess there needs to be some extra checking in case a
>00x.vdr file is missing.

Jepp, the file, not the link!
That's an ugly problem of the linking of the files too.


What should i have done better?





Rainer