Hi to all,

I know this isn't exactly vdr related but it seems nobody has time to look at this problem on linux-dvb mailing list. I'm not a programmer so I can do some testing at home but modifying scan.c is too much for me. Perhaps there are some DVB guru's on this list who could help me ?

I use dvbscan to generate channels.conf file for vdr and the problem is I'm getting wrong NID's in this file. This is a BIG issue because when I do a transponder scan in VDR, it finds the same channels twice because of different (but right) NID's BUT sets VPID and APID to 0. So there are a lot of unusable duplicate channels.

Here is what Johannes Stezenbach said : 2005/10/24, Johannes Stezenbach js@linuxtv.org:

Quite likely the SI data on Hotbird is inconsistent, e.g. the NITs sent on different transponders contain differernt NIDs for the same multiplex. However, I don't have time to look into this, and I don't even have SAT receiption... dvbscan should take the NID only from the NIT entry for the transponder it is currently tuned to (check parse_nit()).

I'm using dvbscan with more than 23 orbital positions and I not only have the problem with Hotbird so I'd really like it to be fixed.

Here is an example : Hotbird 6 (13.0E) - 11662.00 V Multivision channels are NID 318 instead of 176 (see www.lyngsat.com or www.kingofsat.net)

I've made dumps for pids 0 and 16 with "dvbsnoop -pd 7 PID". Each one is about 30 sec.

0.dump.bz2 (4k) : http://www6.rapidupload.com/d.php?file=dl&filepath=1500 16.dump.bz2 (202k) : http://www2.rapidupload.com/d.php?file=dl&filepath=882

--------------------------------------------------------- Transponder PID-Scan... --------------------------------------------------------- PID found: 0 (0x0000) [SECTION: Program Association Table (PAT)] PID found: 16 (0x0010) [SECTION: Network Information Table (NIT) - actual network] PID found: 17 (0x0011) [SECTION: Service Description Table (SDT) - other transport stream] PID found: 18 (0x0012) [SECTION: Event Information Table (EIT) - other transport stream, present/following] ...

I've noticed in 16.dump for PID 16 : Network_ID: 176 (0x00b0) [= >>ERROR: not (yet) defined... Report!<<]

Also, Network_ID reported by dvbsnoop for the example I've given seems to be right (176) in 16.dump.

Thanks for helping,

bluedrops