In message <46B7437A.3010702@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Michael Krufky wrote: Hi. >Steven Toth wrote: >> Nicolas Will wrote: >>> Guys, >>> >>> The HVR4000 looks good on paper, but activity in not heavy, and it has >>> that design flow that prevents it from being real useful (cannot do T >>> and S at the same time). >>> >>> So I am looking for a dedicated DVB-S2 only solution in order to expand >>> my HTPC. >>> >>> So what about the Hauppauge WinTV NOVA-HD-S2 card? The wiki if empty >>> about this one, so I guess it is not the best choice... >>> >>> What would yo propose? Having only recently tested DVB-S2 feeds I find that they work to an extent, there is more testing required, however, I don't think I will be using that feature as there is nothing for me worth watching at this time. >> Darron Broad, another member of this ML is currently reviewing my >> hvr3000 and hvr4000 patches to achieve the same goals. I have started looking at that but have no progress report as yet... >> I'm personally very happy with the hvr4000 support, and the hvr3000 >> approach to multiple frontends on a single bus, but no single tree >> contains both, and it would likely be a large cumbersome patch to submit >> for review for Mauro - so I'm reluctant to do that. Ok. This is understood. Personally I am keen to get the feature set proven to work for my own personal consumption. If anyone is actually interested in helping, for example, testing the hvr3000 in the hvr4000 tree then please e-mail me. >> My goal is to get basic hvr4000 DVB-S/S2 support merged first (after >> multiproto is merged), then follow that with the 'multiple frontend on a >> single bus' HVR3000 patches, thereby enabling DVB-T/S and S2 all in one go. >> >> ... But were a way off, perhaps months from seeing multiproto accept in >> v4l-dvb hg. >> >> If you want to take a shot at merging HVR3000 and 4000 for your own use >> then atleast ping Darron via this ML, you're working on the same thing. >> > >Steve, > >Why not merge DVB-S support only, into the master branch, so that users of that >card can use the features of it that are NOT still up in the air? > >Then, it would only require a patch in order to enable the extra features, and >lessen the load of those changes later on? I originally created some patches to do just the above in March. I have now updated those for anyone who really wants the hvr4000 running in v4l-vlb right now *without* DVB-S2 support, but, I am looking at the merge of those disparate trees mentioned above and may not be able to maintain this. Maybe someone else will pick it up? Here: http://dev.kewl.org/tmp/hvr4000/v4l-dvb-hg.diff Cya darron -- // / {:)==={ Darron Broad <darron@xxxxxxxx> \\ \ _______________________________________________ linux-dvb mailing list linux-dvb@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
