[mythtv-users] Setting up a backend on Ub11.10

[Nick Rout]

On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 4:54 PM, SiR GadaBout <sirgadpc at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi.
>
> SiR GadaBout wrote:
>>>> After this operation, 78.7 MB of additional disk space will be used."
>>>> After this operation, 261 MB of additional disk space will be used."
>
> Tyler T. wrote:
>> I'll be the first to raise my torch and pitchfork against bloat, but
>> honestly, that's a drop in the bucket for a 32GB drive. If you were
>> installing to flash on an embedded device, you'd have a stronger
>> argument. ;)
>
> That's fair - 32GB is sizeable.  However, please note that I said "16GB or
> 32GB".  Frankly, the smaller (and therefore the cheaper) the drive, the
> better.  If trimming a MythTV install will make me comfortable enough to use
> an 8GB drive, even better.  Frankly, I wouldn't be using Linux or MythTV at
> all if I had sufficient cash at my disposal to buy whatever I chose. :)
>
> Michael T. Dean wrote:
>> Have any of you realized how much difference there is between the size
>> of a MythTV frontend and backend install and either a MythTV frontend
>> only install or MythTV backend only install?  We're talking maybe 10MB
>> of HDD space total.
>
> Well, you see, _that's_ useful information.  You have to understand that
> I've turned to MythTV because of the number of times it pops up as a
> potential (and oftentimes, actual) solution to people's DVR-on-Linux
> pursuits.  I'm coming at this as a stranger to the software trying to glean
> more about it from those who hopefully know more than I do.  The impression
> I received from my penultimate chat on the mythtv-users IRC channel was that
> the way mythtv was bundled on Ubuntu 11.10 was inappropriate for my needs,
> and contained more dependencies than were necessary (again, for my needs).
> However, what you are saying is that I may have been misled, and that
> trimming unnecessary dependencies would be like peeling a tomato.  If that's
> true, then I humbly accept it, and thank you for making it clear.
>
>> ease of use is far more important.
>
> I quite agree. Enabling a user to interact successfully with a piece of
> software is something that every developer should aim for.  I might crassly
> point out that that enabling should begin with allowing a user to install
> and configure the software to his satisfaction, otherwise no matter how good
> the UI/UX, your user ain't gonna git very far.  To quote Tyler T.:
>
>>Why put the code in if you're not going to support it?
>
> No offence intended, btw.[\digression]
>
> Karl Dietz wrote:
>> While you don't *need* xmltv in the UK you will likely *want* it because
>> the xmltv grabber for UK enhances the radio times guide with lots of
>> fixups that make setting up recording rules in mythtv a lot easier.
>> (Due to not having to work around low quality guide data)
>
> I use the OTA guides exclusively in EyeTV on my Macs, and have never had a
> problem.  But perhaps this is moot, because…
>
>> I have just reread your original mail and noticed that your primary
>> target seems to be way more easily achieved with other products then
>> MythTV.
>> Like an EyeTV Netstream to get LiveTV to your iOS devices with one of
>> your OS X machines doing the scheduled recordings that you programmed
>> with your phone while on the way.
>
>> MythTV just isn't so great when you want mainly LiveTV and some
>> recordings. It works way better when you setup recordings for everything
>> you might be interested in and stay clear of LiveTV.
>
> I actually concur that MythTV may not be the solution I seek ("These aren't
> the 'droids I'm looking for") - especially after my last and ultimately
> fruitless exchange on the mythtv-users channel (being told to "die in a
> fire" is always a pleasant way to spend an afternoon ^_^ ).  Your suggestion
> that I use one of my OS X machines is one I would happily implement, were it
> not for the fact that my only desktop machine is a 2010 Mac Pro that draws
> more power than my vacuum cleaner, and my other OS X device is a MacBook Pro
> that'd be out with me when I wanted to perform the remote scheduling...  A
> Mac Mini would be ideal, but unless one of you wants to donate £480 to this
> cause, plus £140 for the EyeTV Netstream, I think I'm currently just going
> to give up on this whole adventure…
>
> …but that doesn't bother me too much, in the end.  Frankly (and I am not
> intending to insult anyone here), I'm looking forward to putting this whole
> business behind me - I feel like I've been advised to take a shortcut
> through a brightly-lit, leafy forest that turned out to be a swamp inhabited
> by mostly aggressive characters who insist, when I ask for help out of the
> deep mire, that "you really shouldn't have come this way, stranger", before
> wandering off chucking insults and laughing at the poor fool who was lured
> to his demise.
>
> I guess I'll stay on the list for a day or two more to allow any further
> responses (seems only fair), but I'll unsubscribe by the weekend.
>
> On a more cheerful note: I wish all on the list, and especially those who
> offered advice in the spirit in which it was requested, a very Merry
> Christmas, and, of course, a Happy New Year. :-)
>
> Regards,
>
> S.

You might want to take a look at tvheadend. Nowhere near as
sophisticated as myth, but may meet your needs.