Udo Richter wrote: > J?rn Reder wrote: >> Hmm, it's not that easy because it ignores the original intention of >> this thread. > > Not really. The side effect that osdteletext will force recordings on > the FF card on the same transponder was caused by the change in 1.4.1-2, > that was some time before your post. Its going back to the "[vdr] > device.c: cDevice::GetDevice" topic from syrius.ml. > > The topic did some twists and ended at bandwidth issues on transfer > mode, and I was investigating why at all the recording starts on the > (CAM-capable) FF card instead of the (free-only) budget card. Oh, I thought the budget card was the one with the CAM!? Now that's a whole new aspect... >> It makes no sense that a CAM budget card is always used to >> record a free channel, which makes it impossible to view and/or record >> encrypted channels at the same time. A CAM is a valuable resource, >> wasting it is obviously a bad idea. > > What if the FF card is the only one with the CAM? In this particular case I guess the recording really shouldn't start on the primary card, because the osdteletext plugin isn't a "real" recording process. So how shall we distinguish between cReceivers that do actual recordings and such that just receive, e.g., teletext data? Or those that receive a radio channel for streaming it to a remote client? Where's the limit? Klaus
