[vdr] [ANNOUNCE] vdr-autosort-0.0.4 - a channel autosorter

CopyPoint info at copypointburscheid.de
Sat Nov 12 12:58:01 CET 2005


At 10:09 12.11.05 +0100, you wrote:

>This would be really a clean approach, but I don't think, that you will
>get inconsistency as long as the channels get referenced by their ID.
>Moving a channel, that is just edited should work...Or do I miss
>something? I have to check how vdr references channels...

No, just editing won't harm, but if user deletes a channel or just moves it 
out of AutoSort-Section
         the channel could be reapear
         the channel could be double
         the hole thing could crash
But i stop thinking here - i try.


> >> I really don't know how I could live without that plugin. Finally all my
> >> 2500 channels are sorted the way I alway wanted them :)
> >>
> >> I only miss sorting by frequency (=transponder)
> >
> > that needs a fuzzy-factor by some Hz. But what do you wanna reach with
> > that?
>
>Isn't vdr taking care of that?
>
>from channels.c:
>bool cChannel::SetSatTransponderData(int Source, int Frequency, char
>Polarization, int Srate, int CoderateH)
>{
>   // Workarounds for broadcaster stupidity:
>   // Some providers broadcast the transponder frequency of their
>channels with two different
>   // values (like 12551 and 12552), so we need to allow for a little
>tolerance here
>   if (abs(frequency - Frequency) <= 1)
>      Frequency = frequency;
>   // Sometimes the transponder frequency is set to 0, which is just wrong
>   if (Frequency == 0)
>      return false;

On 13E (HotBird) the frequency seems to differ by up to 30
my log is full of channel changes for a few Hz


>I'd like filtering for freq for the following reasons:
>- Once a month I clean my channels.conf, removing all dead channels. I
>put a "DEAD -" in front of all channelnames and switch to every
>transponder for about 10 sec. with "update names" enabled. There are
>some channels that are still not "dead", but don't get their names
>updated. So I delete these channels, switch to a channel on the same
>transponder and let this channel be readded. Having the channels ordered
>by freq makes this easy...

Rejected - that good old idea doesn't need a transponder separation, it can 
be done completely automated as dicussed here a long time ago.


>- I have only 1 card. If channels are ordered by freq, I can see with
>channels can be recorded at simultaniously.

Confirmed


I give highest priority to the 'complete-run-for-config-debug-button'
that seems to be the hardest entry problem, let see what comes inbetween.

         Thorsten





More information about the vdr mailing list