Hi, Am Montag, 16. April 2007 11:54 schrieb Mauro Borghi: > Dear Christoph, all, > > Christoph Pfister wrote: > > Hi, > > > > 2007/4/14, P. van Gaans <w3ird_n3rd@xxxxxxx>: > >> Say you live in The Netherlands. Frequencies change here all the time, > >> and QAM settings and stuff also change all the time. Say you're living > >> on the border, like me. I receive channels from The Netherlands and > >> Belgium at the same time, but there's no scan file for that. There will > >> also always be locations missing in the list. > >> > >> And what if you simply have no clue about where you live? Nobody thinks > >> of them! Then again, nobody knows where they are ;-) > >> > >> So here is the solution: a file that'll make Kaffeine scan all UHF > >> channels with "AUTO" for the QAM and other stuff, will be sufficient in > >> most countries although scanning takes a bit longer. > >> > >> I hope it makes it into some next version of Kaffeine :). > >> > >> Pim > > > > <snip> > > > > There are enough cases where such a file doesn't work (think of > > offsets, 7 mhz transponders etc). Responsible for such complete > > scannings are the apps (kaffeine has auto scan which does pretty much > > the same as your file does and it tries offsets iirc). > > > > Christoph > > I think dvb-t scan files should be organized in 3 "levels": > 1. specific location > 2. specific country > 3. most general case > > For 1. the scan will be fast, because only frequencies known to be > active will be scanned - and most params will be known. > > For 2., we should refer to the frequency allocation plan of a given > country, so that all possible frequencies (and bandwidths) are listed - > with other params left to autodetection. Hmm ... imho this is either a summation of 1. (means we need to know all transmitters; would make sense e.g. in places where you can receive data from different broadcasters) or 3. (I don't see how the the number of possibilities is significantly reduced for a specific country without knowing all transmitters). > 3. should be the union of all known center frequencies used somewhere, > listed more than once if other params may change (e.g. bandwidth 6 or 7 > or 8 MHz). The scan will probably be very slow, but the goal is to > maximize the chance to get all available muxes. I'm a bit sceptical about the practical implementation of that and whether it would work reliably ... > When the scan file for your specific location (1.) is not present or > does not work, you can try 2., and if 2. is not enough you could try 3. > > Cheers, > Mauro. Christoph _______________________________________________ linux-dvb mailing list linux-dvb@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
