[linux-dvb] Twinhan VP1030A CI/CAM problems and solutions

linuxtv at zacglen.com.au linuxtv at zacglen.com.au
Sun Apr 9 10:16:18 CEST 2006


>linuxtv at zacglen.com.au wrote:
>>> linuxtv at zacglen.com.au wrote:
>>>     
>>>> There seem to be quite a few problems getting TwinHan VP1030 etc
>>>> Conditional Access Module working properly.
>>>>
>>>> The LinuxTV wiki says they dont work (mostly) and so do various
>>>> other application writers (eg. mythtv, videolan, etc).
>>>>       
>>> The information on the Wiki is a bit outdated. Both the applications you 
>>> mentioned do have support.
>>>     
>>
>> Ahem ... they may have support, but the applications do/did *not* work
>> properly with my irdeto CAM.
>>
>> I know this because of the extensive patching that was required to
>> make them work!
>>
>>   
>
>It does work for me, many people are using it successfully. FYI, I am 
>using an Irdeto module
>For others too it seems to work okay with other applications too as well 
>as ca_zap. Search for a thread like this..
>
>[linux-dvb] Re: High level CI support in MythTV
>
>Regarding Videolan, the relevant person who added support may comment.

Are you sure you are using a TwinHan VP1030A and not some other card?
Very definitely did not work for me.

I can run original ca_zap and it doesn't work.
I can run modified ca_zap and it does work.

What am I to make of your comment?

>
>>> Somebody should update the info on the Wiki in regards to the relevant 
>>> status.
>>>
>>> Regarding MythTV, http://threebit.net/mail-archive/mythtv-dev/msg01711.html
>>>
>>>     
>>
>> But I don't have any compile problems and I haven't applied a patch
>> multiple times ... what exactly is the revelance?
>>   
>
>[..]
>
>Explained above
>

Really? You link only relates to somebody having a problem
compiling a kernel module because he applied patch twice.
How is that relevant, and how does "Explained above" explain the relevance?




More information about the linux-dvb mailing list