[vdr] Re: Error handling vs. user friendliness.

[Josef Wolf <jw@raven.inka.de>]

On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 03:47:30PM +0100, Reiner Buehl wrote:

> >         0      Successful program execution.
> >         1      An error has been detected which requires the 
> >                DVB driver and vdr to be reloaded.
> >         2      An non-recoverable error has been detected, 
> >                vdr has given up.
> 
> Great, so this is already in place. Then only the occurences of 
> fatal exits need to be checked and evaluated if they should be 
> really fatal or if vdr could still run.

This will still not avoid the endless reload cycles.  It might be OK to
make one or two tries to reload drivers.  But when two reloads don't help,
two hundered reloads won't help either.

> > Ok, so in case of an error at startup we could turn off the automatic
> > saving of channels.conf and only save it when the user explicitly
> > makes a change.

But keep the lines which were not changed by the user, even if they are
broken.

> Yes, and just log the offending line(s).

And put a warning on OSD.

> > However, what if the channels.conf file is so broken that no channels
> > can be read at all? Should VDR still start? What if only one or two
> > channels are ok? Where's the limit?
> 
> If no channels can be read I would consider it fatal.

I disagree.  The user might want to watch a recording.  The user should be
able to check which timers are set.  In the future, scanning functionality
(as well known from set-top-receivers) might be available, and should be
accessible even with a broken channels.conf.  I don't see any pro's in
handle such a situation fatal.  Just provide the user with the important
information.  Then will the user be able to shut down himself _if_ he
decides that this is a fatal error for him in the given situation.

-- 
No software patents!
-- Josef Wolf -- jw@raven.inka.de --