<div class="gmail_quote">On 20 May 2011 14:53, Simon Hobson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:linux@thehobsons.co.uk">linux@thehobsons.co.uk</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<br>
Wouldn't help. Myth doesn't deal with "this mux isn't tuning so I'll<br>
try another" - you just get empty recordings if a transmitter is off<br>
(not that it happens all that much).<br>
<div><div></div><br></div></blockquote></div>DOH!!!<br>
Are you sure?<br>
>From the last couple of days, I've got as far as thinking myth did the "I have 4 copies of channel 4, so starting with the lowest, can I have this one?" ... So if it couldn't (no signal) ... I'd of thought it would go on to
the next? In which case, the theoretical best for me would to have all the channels laid out from all the receivers, numbered with the lowest being the
strongest signal options.<br>
<br>
If yer right ... then there's no point ever having a duplicate, because if it picks a dud first I'll get a blank recording anyway?