Re: MythTV vs php

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On Thursday 27 August 2009, Kevin J. Cummings wrote:
>On 08/27/2009 12:24 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
>>> I'm surprised, as I have a pcHDTV-5500 running in my system....
>>> The card can only be used for either NTSC or ATSC, but it can be
>>> switched between when the other is not in use.  I have used it to view
>>> OTA and now clearQAM cable with only a re-configuration in MythTV.
>> That cable is yet another modulation standard, and I wasn't aware that
>> the ATSC code could function with QAM rather than 8VSB.  Or maybe that is
>> one of the diffs between my -3000 and your -5500?
>Uh, no, it shouldn't be.  ATSC is the encompassing standard, it
>*includes* either QAM or 8VSB.  AFAIK, both PCHDTV boards support both
>QAM[64/128/256] and 8VSB.  But, only 1 at a time.  You have to specify
>the signal type to scan for when you do the scan.  Originally, I had
>mine setup for OTA (8VSB).  Then, after my cable went digital only, I
>connected it to my cable, and I rescanned as QAM-256.
>According to the WWW site, they have a firmware download for
>PC-2000 and PC-3000 cards which support
>> This firmware supports ATSC and QAM on the HD-3000 and ATSC on the
>> HD-2000.
>So, it seems that with the right firmware, your HD-3000 should do either
>8VSB and QAM.

Unless the firmware has changed in the last ~90 days, I have had that 
installed for quite some time.  But I'll recheck just in case.  About the 3rd 
link down in a poodle search for pcHDTV-3000 firmware, there is a 2 line 
script I just ran, and got this response:
[[email protected] src]# cd linux-2.6.31-rc7/Documentation/dvb; perl 
syntax: get_dvb_firmware <component>
Supported components:

So it looks as if I need to further specify it as or51132_vsb for me.  So I 
did, then did a cmp on the one I have in /lib/firmware vs this one, and they 
are indeed identical.

I have a friend who is running MythTV  and maybe I can con him into visiting 
some night to see if he can help.  Might cost me a few bottles of Guiness 
though.  Maybe I should develop a taste for it, its zero calories and I'm 
diabetic. :)

But, to get back to the OP's (me) subject, how to get word to rpmfusion's 
people that it is not presently an installable batch of updates due to this 
missing dependency, and one who's name in fact makes zero sense.  There may 
be in fact php-process's but it makes no sense to have such a dependency, it 
needs to be based on an actual php process's name.  Probably a friggin typu 
someplace, but its a showstopper none-the-less when there isn't a readily 
available path to the developers involved.

Putting the bz facility behind a login at rpmfusion is the best way yet I've 
found to discourage user complaints.  I already have 3 sheets of paper taped 
to the wall to my left with login/pw combo's written on it, and no room for 

RJW has done a truly excellent job of fixing the bz problems up for the linux 
kernel, and it seems he should be teaching other admins how to do it.

Who, at rpmfusion, might I email regarding this?


Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
The NRA is offering FREE Associate memberships to anyone who wants them.

Windows without the X is like making love without a partner.
	-- MaDsen Wikholm, [email protected]

fedora-list mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe:

[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux