On 03/07/11 14:13, Frank Schmirler wrote: > On Mon, 07 Mar 2011 13:33:47 +0100, Klaus Schmidinger wrote >> On 03/07/11 13:23, Frank Schmirler wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 17:15:44 +0100, Klaus Schmidinger wrote >>>> The problem is that the VPS code in vdr.c avoids devices that are >>>> currently recording. And since this is a rather complex area, >>>> I'm not sure if it's too good an idea to change this ;-) >>>> >>>> If you feel like it, you may want to take a look at the code under >>>> >>>> // Find a device that provides the required transponder: >>>> >>>> in vdr.c. Maybe you can come up with a better solution... >>> >>> Unless I've missed something, that code does not only ignore priorities but >>> also the availability of CAMs. >> >> We only need the EIT data here, which is not encrypted. >> So it's sufficient to find a device that provides the >> raw transponder. > > Ah, I see. I ignored the fact, that at the moment this piece of code is only > looking for a way to see the VPS start flag for the timer. Still the GetDevice > call (or something alike) would become necessary when considering to interrupt > a recording with lower priority. The low priority recording shouldn't be > interrupted if the VPS recording cannot start later as e.g. the CAM is in use > by a higher priority recording. Looks like this is beginning to become "rocket science" again ;-) Klaus _______________________________________________ vdr mailing list vdr@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
