[mythtv-users] channel table 'icon' column - setting the path

[Michael T. Dean]

On 12/17/2007 09:55 PM, Rich West wrote:
> The irony was that I was following the thread, which got me started on 
> fixing the call signs (which I lost when I upgraded my back end for some 
> reason).  However, it didn't cover what I was looking to correct (the 
> path stored in the DB).

http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/users/305717#305717
does--it doesn't give the answer but gives a link to the answer.  You
probably read through the thread before you received that post, though. 
I apologize for assuming you weren't reading the thread.  I just found
it disappointing that this thread asked for an answer I had just gone to
the trouble of typing up elsewhere.

>   I had no problems getting the icons downloaded, 
> but they wouldn't display on the frontend.  I figured it was because 
> mythfilldatabase placed them all in /root/.mythtv/channels on the 
> backend system, which isn't accessible on the frontend systems.
>   

If the user running mythfrontend has access to (any system's)
/root/.mythtv/channels directory, you just need to ensure there's a copy
of the files on that system (i.e. copy /root/.mythtv/channels to all of
your frontends).  If the user running mythfrontend does not have access
to /root/.mythtv/channels (i.e. if you're not running mythfrontend as
root, this should be the case), you'll have to put the icons elsewhere
with MYTHCONFDIR and a manual mythfilldatabase run.

> Although, as I write this, I checked the frontend systems again, and the 
> icons are all there (they weren't there all day!).. argh.  They must've 
> been cached or something.. :(  Ah, well.. egg on my face, eh?
>   

It's possible that nothing was in the DB/no files were on the filesystem
until today's mythfilldatabase ran (though that would only put the files
on the filesystem of the system running mythfilldatabase).

> http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/users/294101#294101 did 
> reference the environment variable MYTHCONFDIR, which was what I was 
> looking for. :) (it was in a link in a response you posted which was 
> linked in the thread that you referenced above. ;-)  ).

Yep.  I don't always summarize all of the good information in all of the
linked posts.  I tend to make the assumption that if the answer is
important to someone, he'll read through (or at least glance at) the
linked posts, because they are--as should be obvious--relevant to the
topic (which is why the other relevant post linked to them).  :)

Mike