Hi,
I've been using vdr for a number of years now, mainly keeping abreast of the latest development versions. However, I "missed" the upgrades that incorporated FHS standards (busy with other stuff, etc.).
I'm currently running vdr-1.7.29 (I think the last version before the changes) but think I should take the plunge and upgrade. I did do some very quick tests with vdr-2.0.3 but could never work out which config files to move where!
Is there any simple way of working out which files go in CONFDIR and what goes in CACHEDIR, for example?
Or is the easiest method to backup all of my current config files, build with my set of plugins, fire it up, and then see what new config files get created where and copy over the original set?
Or I could just grep the source for config and cache.
Others must have made this transition so any tips would be greatly received.
Cheers,
Laz
Hi, Have a look to Make.config.template if you want to use vdr 2.x like 1.6 running in one single dir! Regards halim
On 4 November 2013 10:22, Halim Sahin halim.sahin@t-online.de wrote:
Hi, Have a look to Make.config.template if you want to use vdr 2.x like 1.6 running in one single dir!
Yeah, I saw that sort of thing is doable but it's probably worth my while doing things "properly" to fit in with the current way of thinking.
Cheers,
Laz
Hi, Have a look to Make.config.template if you want to use vdr 2.x like 1.6 running in one single dir!
Yeah, I saw that sort of thing is doable but it's probably worth my while doing things "properly" to fit in with the current way of thinking.
It's not `improper` to keep the same pre-FHS structure. A lot of people don't care about FHS. I personally don't like files spread out all over the place. Instead I prefer things be kept in a single location so things are easy to keep track of. For that reason, I also use ONEDIR=1 in my vdr Make.config. I didn't have to move any files anywhere and upgraded VDR with no problem.
Don't do something because someone else does it. Do it because it's what you actually want. If you don't want it that way, why force yourself to go against your own preference? Especially if you're using linux where anything goes.
Hi,
Am 04.11.2013 17:17, schrieb VDR User:
Hi, Have a look to Make.config.template if you want to use vdr 2.x like 1.6 running in one single dir!
Yeah, I saw that sort of thing is doable but it's probably worth my while doing things "properly" to fit in with the current way of thinking.
It's not `improper` to keep the same pre-FHS structure. A lot of people don't care about FHS. I personally don't like files spread out all over the place. Instead I prefer things be kept in a single location so things are easy to keep track of. For that reason, I also use ONEDIR=1 in my vdr Make.config. I didn't have to move any files anywhere and upgraded VDR with no problem.
Don't do something because someone else does it. Do it because it's what you actually want. If you don't want it that way, why force yourself to go against your own preference? Especially if you're using linux where anything goes.
And I'm pretty sure vdr will always support the "one directory" setup, because Klaus is using it (as far as I know).
Regards, Lars.
On 04.11.2013 21:25, Lars Hanisch wrote:
Hi,
Am 04.11.2013 17:17, schrieb VDR User:
Hi, Have a look to Make.config.template if you want to use vdr 2.x like 1.6 running in one single dir!
Yeah, I saw that sort of thing is doable but it's probably worth my while doing things "properly" to fit in with the current way of thinking.
It's not `improper` to keep the same pre-FHS structure. A lot of people don't care about FHS. I personally don't like files spread out all over the place. Instead I prefer things be kept in a single location so things are easy to keep track of. For that reason, I also use ONEDIR=1 in my vdr Make.config. I didn't have to move any files anywhere and upgraded VDR with no problem.
Don't do something because someone else does it. Do it because it's what you actually want. If you don't want it that way, why force yourself to go against your own preference? Especially if you're using linux where anything goes.
And I'm pretty sure vdr will always support the "one directory" setup, because Klaus is using it (as far as I know).
You bet! ;-)
Klaus
To me, dumping files all over the drives is messy, sloppy, and bad practice. Always has been and always will be. Someone just wants to copy MS stupidity into linux.
On 11/4/2013 2:16 PM, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
On 04.11.2013 21:25, Lars Hanisch wrote:
Hi,
Am 04.11.2013 17:17, schrieb VDR User:
Hi, Have a look to Make.config.template if you want to use vdr 2.x like 1.6 running in one single dir!
Yeah, I saw that sort of thing is doable but it's probably worth my while doing things "properly" to fit in with the current way of thinking.
It's not `improper` to keep the same pre-FHS structure. A lot of people don't care about FHS. I personally don't like files spread out all over the place. Instead I prefer things be kept in a single location so things are easy to keep track of. For that reason, I also use ONEDIR=1 in my vdr Make.config. I didn't have to move any files anywhere and upgraded VDR with no problem.
Don't do something because someone else does it. Do it because it's what you actually want. If you don't want it that way, why force yourself to go against your own preference? Especially if you're using linux where anything goes.
And I'm pretty sure vdr will always support the "one directory" setup, because Klaus is using it (as far as I know).
You bet! ;-)
Klaus
vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
On 11/04/2013 11:58 PM, Timothy D. Lenz wrote:
To me, dumping files all over the drives is messy, sloppy, and bad practice. Always has been and always will be. Someone just wants to copy MS stupidity into linux.
Maybe so, but as that is supported it would be good if there are clean install instructions for doing that. I tried that once put found out that at least some of the plugins failed to install correctly for me and I needed to do symlinks, etc. to be able to start vdr properly.
Maybe it was just my fault but I can try to test with newest version of everything once I get to place where I have that vdr 2.0 system running.
Mika
Having had a quick look, I ended up defining both LCLBLD=1 and ONEDIR=1 and it all built fine (with a few edits to add cVideoDirectory:: to the relevant bits in several plugins...) and I was up and running with version 2.1.2.
I may or may not look into the FHS bits at a later date...
Cheers,
Laz
On Mon, 04 Nov 2013 14:58:30 -0700 "Timothy D. Lenz" tlenz@vorgon.com wrote:
To me, dumping files all over the drives is messy, sloppy, and bad practice. Always has been and always will be. Someone just wants to copy MS stupidity into linux.
I think some features from the FHS predate Windows and even Microsoft. Having every file belonging to an application in the same place is insecure and makes it more difficult to support things like multiple users or one user with multiple PCs, especially if some of them are thin clients.
To me, dumping files all over the drives is messy, sloppy, and bad practice. Always has been and always will be. Someone just wants to copy MS stupidity into linux.
I think some features from the FHS predate Windows and even Microsoft. Having every file belonging to an application in the same place is insecure and makes it more difficult to support things like multiple users or one user with multiple PCs, especially if some of them are thin clients.
In my case every one of my vdr boxes are dedicated single-user htpcs. For me, having all of vdrs files in one location makes backups very easy to create & restore. Additionally, navigating to whatever file I need is simple -- no hunting or trying to remember what is where. My only big wish as far as setup goes is vdr getting real & solid server/client support, and the good news there is that unless things have changed, it's actually on Klaus's TODO list. But anyways, thanks to ONEDIR and LCLBLD, I can completely ignore FHS with no hassle at all.