[mythtv] Re: MythTV Crashes on channel change

[Ben Bucksch]

Martin Smith wrote:

>The DVB Channel object includes the card number. This complicates the notion of "are these channels compatibile" because it has to consider card level things that are not channel properties if you see what I mean. 
>
>For DVB an additional channel can only be recorded if there are less than four open captures on the same card and the frequency etc. matches. The channel object probably shouldn't have the knowledge of who else is using the card at the same time.
>
I don't get you. It does anyways, the Channel object is what does the 
tuning for a certain card. (Despite the name, it does *not* represent a 
single channel, but the tuner.) So, it would be exactly the place to 
know, if the card has the capability to tune to yet another channel.

>If this info on how cards can share tuners and channels was put into the
>database then it would work for analogue, DVB and other types of card in future without code changes to scheduling each time.
>
I don't think so. I don't think that all possible, future schemes can be 
fit into the notion of "channel group". With the database, you have to 
place things in a certain data structure, and with that structure, you 
make certain implications / impose restrictions. If you leave things to 
the Channel *object*, you can use different *code* for each type of 
Channel, so you have pretty much complete freedom.

For example, as you said, some DVB cards can only tune to 4 channels at 
the same time, if use_ts=1. Maybe more, if use_ts=0. How do you want to 
represent that in the DB with your "channel group" scheme?

>I guess there's no harm in me playing with this idea a bit and seeing if it does actually work?
>
If you want to invest the time, sure...