Oliver Joa <ojoa@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, Luis Palacios wrote: > > [...] > >> IN >> dvb-* >> | | Normal >> +--------+ Antenna >> | vdr | _/// >> +-| box | |\\\ >> | +--------+ | >> | | | O >> IR | | | >> /RF net tvout/audio / >> | +-+-------+ / >> | |modulator|_/ >> | +-+-------+ >> | | >> | | +------+ >> | antenna | TV | remote+ >> | cabling--| | + IR/RF >> | +------+ >> | +------+ >> +-|vdr | >> |client|+-------+ >> +--+---+|Monitor| >> +----+or TV | >> +-------+ > > i have the same problem like you. i am searching/waiting for a > streaming-solution which gives the complete picture, including osd, > and maybe a solution for transporting the remote-control-commands back > to the server. i think a lot of people want to have a > fat-server/thin-multiple-client -solution. i wonder how people get > enough cables from antenna to nearby the tv. i have only one cable, so > i can not put in more than 1 card. Here I don't have analog tv nor analog tvout, but I have 2 dvb-s cards. For me the perfect solution would be a mix of xine+net and streamdev. Ideally vdr-xine (+ network) would allow several clients to connect independently. It would use multicast to send the video and use tcp to get command from the client. I could run 2 vdr processes and have a vdr-xine+network per vdr. but it's not handy on the client side. (sure, there're always solutions...) (either 1 dvb card per vdr, or the 2 cards for the 1st vdr and the 2nd vdr connected to the first with streamdev vtp) There might be constraints in vdr or/and vdr-xine not allowing this more easily, i'm don't really know. I guess vdr 1.5 could be even more modular ! :) --
