[vdr] Re: DiSEqC support

[Oliver Endriss <o.endriss@gmx.de>]

Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
> I'm in the process of implementing fully configurable DiSEqC support
> into VDR and have put together the specification for the
> 'diseqc.conf' file:
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>--------- # DiSEqC configuration for VDR
> #
> # Format:
> #
> # satellite slof polarization lof command...
> #
> # satellite:      one of the 'S' codes defined in sources.conf
> # slof:           switch frequency of LNB; the first entry with
> #                 an slof greater than the actual transponder
> #                 frequency will be used
> # polarization:   V = vertical, H = horizontal
> # lof:            the local oscillator frequency to subtract from
> #                 the actual transponder frequency
> # command:
> #   t             tone off
> #   T             tone on
> #   v             voltage low
> #   V             voltage high
> #   Wnn           wait nn milliseconds
> #   A             mini A
> #   B             mini B
> #   [ xx xx ...]  hex code sequence (max. 6)
>
> S19.2E  11700 V  9750  t v W15 [E0 10 38 F0] W15 A W15 t
> S19.2E  99999 V 10600  t v W15 [E0 10 38 F1] W15 A W15 T
> S19.2E  11700 H  9750  t V W15 [E0 10 38 F2] W15 A W15 t
> S19.2E  99999 H 10600  t V W15 [E0 10 38 F3] W15 A W15 T
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>---------
>
> The idea is to have the information which satellite is supposed to be
> received, as well as which transponder frequency and polarization.
> With that input data, 'diseqc.conf' is used to determine the proper
> sequence of actions to take in order to make the DiSEqC equipment
> switch to the desired state.
>
> The commands shown in the above example implement the DiSEqC sequence
> suggested by the NEWSTRUCT driver documentation.
>
> The concept should be flexible enough to allow all sorts of DiSEqC
> setups to be realized (for instance, "Disicon" LNBs should be easily
> handled).
>
> Maybe those amoung you with better understanding of DiSEqC than
> myself might want to take a look at this proposed specification and
> let me know whether there is anything I missed - or if I'm totally
> wrong with this approach.

This should work as long as there is no need for processing DiSEqC 
reply messages (introduced in DiSEqC 2.x).
AFAIK current DVB-S cards cannot receive DiSEqC messages.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
For 2.x reply messages the format needs to be extended using some kind 
of expect-send blocks. (UUCP used such a syntax for automatic login.)

It should be possible to specify delays > 99ms, too.
When using cascaded switches powered by the bus, a slave may need
>= 100ms to initialize (according to the spec).

Oliver



-- 
Info:
To unsubscribe send a mail to listar@linuxtv.org with "unsubscribe vdr" as subject.