On 02.01.2012 5:12 , Torgeir Veimo wrote:
RAM is cheap enough now days that having plenty of it isn't a problem
for most people. For example, 4GB will cost you less than a few hours
at the pub with friends. :)
The OP probably meant to have the option to use RAM directly without
fiddling with a
On 2 January 2012 10:19, VDR User wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 1:31 PM, René wrote:
>>> There was talk of this some time ago, though I don't think anything
>>> solid came of it. I personally am not interested in it unless ram came
>>> be used for the buffer storage. Having a harddrive (or even
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 1:31 PM, René wrote:
>> There was talk of this some time ago, though I don't think anything
>> solid came of it. I personally am not interested in it unless ram came
>> be used for the buffer storage. Having a harddrive (or even worse, an
>> ssd) in a constant write state 24
On 01.01.2012 22:13 , VDR User wrote:
There was talk of this some time ago, though I don't think anything
solid came of it. I personally am not interested in it unless ram came
be used for the buffer storage. Having a harddrive (or even worse, an
ssd) in a constant write state 24/7 is not somethi
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 11:44 AM, René wrote:
> the official gentoo overlay? Even better if it could be added as a basic
> feature of vdr (that could be turned on/off from the settings :-) Klaus?
> Please, please, please :-)
There was talk of this some time ago, though I don't think anything
s
On 01.01.2012 20:23 , Marc wrote:
Hi René,
You can watch the output of the patch
(/var/tmp/portage/media-video/vdr-1.7.21-r2/temp/0001-opt-96-livebuffer12-rmm.dpatch-rebased-onto-1.7.21.patch.out)
and see where it fails.
vdr 1.7.22 is out now on vdr-devel overlay. I'll post an updated patch
for
On 01/01/2012 18:41, René wrote:
On 23.12.2011 14:27 , Marc wrote:
There is a typo error in vdr.c but that's all.
For gentoo users, I attached the patches I use. I relocated some hunk of
config.c and config.h and renamed USE_LIVEBUFFER to LIVEBUFFER in
Makefile.
Patch the ebuild and put the
On 23.12.2011 14:27 , Marc wrote:
There is a typo error in vdr.c but that's all.
For gentoo users, I attached the patches I use. I relocated some hunk of
config.c and config.h and renamed USE_LIVEBUFFER to LIVEBUFFER in Makefile.
Patch the ebuild and put the other patch in
/etc/portage/patches/
> It's a patch from yaVDR and it doesn't apply to the vdr source tree as is
> (at least for me).
Here's the patch from yaVDR rebased to apply to vanilla 1.7.21 sources:
https://gist.github.com/1513894
https://raw.github.com/gist/1513894
___
vdr mailin
On 22/12/2011 23:07, René wrote:
On 22.12.2011 23:32 , Marc wrote:
It's a patch from yaVDR and it doesn't apply to the vdr source tree as
is (at least for me). The second patch works on gentoo ebuild with small
changes (It conflicts with other patches and need some changes for
config.c & config
On 22.12.2011 23:32 , Marc wrote:
It's a patch from yaVDR and it doesn't apply to the vdr source tree as
is (at least for me). The second patch works on gentoo ebuild with small
changes (It conflicts with other patches and need some changes for
config.c & config.h part).
I tried the second too
On 22/12/2011 22:17, René wrote:
On 22.12.2011 19:36 , Tim wrote:
Am Dienstag, 20. Dezember 2011, um 23:12:39 schrieb Lists:
On 11-12-20 05:08 PM, René wrote:
Hi All,
I'm stuck to vdr 1.6.0-2 because i can't find a current LiveBuffer
patch for any current vdr 1.7.x. Does anyone know if there
On 22.12.2011 19:36 , Tim wrote:
Am Dienstag, 20. Dezember 2011, um 23:12:39 schrieb Lists:
On 11-12-20 05:08 PM, René wrote:
Hi All,
I'm stuck to vdr 1.6.0-2 because i can't find a current LiveBuffer
patch for any current vdr 1.7.x. Does anyone know if there is any work
going on with this gre
> And no, this patch is not from Gerald D. as the header of the patch
might imply ;) regards, Tim
It is true that the code in the original patch is not made by me, but
the patch is made by me, because I had to manipulate the original patch
so that it fits to the changes the yaVDR-Team made to
Am Dienstag, 20. Dezember 2011, um 23:12:39 schrieb Lists:
> On 11-12-20 05:08 PM, René wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I'm stuck to vdr 1.6.0-2 because i can't find a current LiveBuffer
> > patch for any current vdr 1.7.x. Does anyone know if there is any work
> > going on with this great patch?
loo
On 22/12/2011 17:04, Artem Makhutov wrote:
Hi,
René schrieb:
On 21.12.2011 13:34 , Norm Dressler wrote:
On 12/21/2011 3:48 AM, René wrote:
On 21.12.2011 24:12 , Lists wrote:
I'm stuck to vdr 1.6.0-2 because i can't find a current LiveBuffer
patch for any current vdr 1.7.x. Does anyone know
Hi,
René schrieb:
On 21.12.2011 13:34 , Norm Dressler wrote:
On 12/21/2011 3:48 AM, René wrote:
On 21.12.2011 24:12 , Lists wrote:
I'm stuck to vdr 1.6.0-2 because i can't find a current LiveBuffer
patch for any current vdr 1.7.x. Does anyone know if there is any work
going on with this grea
On 21.12.2011 13:34 , Norm Dressler wrote:
On 12/21/2011 3:48 AM, René wrote:
On 21.12.2011 24:12 , Lists wrote:
I'm stuck to vdr 1.6.0-2 because i can't find a current LiveBuffer
patch for any current vdr 1.7.x. Does anyone know if there is any work
going on with this great patch?
Here you
On 12/21/2011 3:48 AM, René wrote:
On 21.12.2011 24:12 , Lists wrote:
I'm stuck to vdr 1.6.0-2 because i can't find a current LiveBuffer
patch for any current vdr 1.7.x. Does anyone know if there is any work
going on with this great patch?
Here you go. I grabbed this from the yaVDR source.
On 21.12.2011 24:12 , Lists wrote:
I'm stuck to vdr 1.6.0-2 because i can't find a current LiveBuffer
patch for any current vdr 1.7.x. Does anyone know if there is any work
going on with this great patch?
Here you go. I grabbed this from the yaVDR source.
Norm
Hi Norm,
Thanks!! Do you kno
Hi All,
I'm stuck to vdr 1.6.0-2 because i can't find a current LiveBuffer patch
for any current vdr 1.7.x. Does anyone know if there is any work going
on with this great patch?
Regards,
René
___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxt
21 matches
Mail list logo
