On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 02:50:05PM +0100, Oliver Endriss wrote: > On Tuesday 15 March 2011 13:32:58 Janne Grunau wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 01:23:40PM +0100, Christian Ulrich wrote: > > > Hi, thank you for your feedback. > > > > > > Indeed, I never used -r alone, but only with -p. > > > So with your patch, [acst]zap -r will be the same as -rp. That looks good to me. > > > > well, azap not yet. iirc I implemented -p for azap but it was never > > applied since nobody tested it. see attached patch for [cst]zap > > NAK. I think we had the same discussion when I submitted -p for czap and tzap. > The PAT/PMT from the stream does not describe the dvr stream correctly. > > The dvr device provides *some* PIDs of the transponder, while the > PAT/PMT reference *all* programs of the transponder. True, the PAT references some PMT pids which won't be included. All pids from the desired program should be included. A transport stream without PAT/PMT is as invalid as the stream with incorrect PAT/PMT/missing pids but the second is easier to handle for player software than the first. > For correct results the PAT/PMT has to be re-created. That's not possible from ?zap and I hope you don't suggest we add PMT/PAT rewriting routines to kernel software demuxer. > The separate -p option seems acceptable - as a debug feature. -r is as much a debug feature as -p. the output is invalid too Janne -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
