The rotor plugin doesn't seem to be maintained anymore and was always somewhat of a hack to vdr. Seems to me rotor control should really be a part of vdr diseqc control code. Just about every sat box out there includes rotor control function.
I also looked at the Actuator plugin because I am interested in getting something going with c-band and thought maybe it included rotor commands. Don't it does, doesn't look like it's been updated since vdr-1.6.0, and requires a custom kernel module. I don't mind building custom electronics and was planing to anyway. But I don't want to have to hack code into the kernel. I think they have boxes that provide actuator control from rotor diseqc commands anyway which brings us back to including it.
I would also like to see it be able to handle a rotor per card. Not much point in having several sat tuners if they all have to look at the same sat.
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Timothy D. Lenz tlenz@vorgon.com wrote:
The rotor plugin doesn't seem to be maintained anymore and was always somewhat of a hack to vdr. Seems to me rotor control should really be a part of vdr diseqc control code. Just about every sat box out there includes rotor control function.
I've seen numerous people make the same request and although I don't use a rotor myself, I do agree support for it should be included in vanilla VDR as it's a basic common function & equipment. I'll guess that if enough people reply to this thread that Klaus may add it to his TODO list (assuming it isn't there already).
I would also like to see it be able to handle a rotor per card. Not much point in having several sat tuners if they all have to look at the same sat.
I'm sure if Klaus decides to implement this, he'll do it in such a way that makes the most sense & flexibile usability to maximize the benefit of adding it. No point in adding more functionality if you leave it crippled. :)
Cheers
Al 23/06/10 23:04, En/na Timothy D. Lenz ha escrit:
I also looked at the Actuator plugin because I am interested in getting something going with c-band and thought maybe it included rotor commands. Don't it does, doesn't look like it's been updated since vdr-1.6.0,
Hi, I didn't update the released version (it seems there are only two users of the plugin), but I'm using it with vdr 1.7.15 (with the transponder tuning and channel scanning commented out, I don't have much time or need to work on that).
and requires a custom kernel module. I don't mind building custom electronics and was planing to anyway. But I don't want to have to hack code into the kernel.
It's a really simple out of tree module, you don't need to hack the kernel, just to compile the module and insmod it. It hasn't caused me any problem in the many years I have used it. BTW, the module uses a parallel port, and since these are becoming difficult to find, I wrote another, unreleased, one that uses a serial port (even an usb to serial adapter should work). Of course I'm not (still) using it in production, so it's not as tested as the one using the parallel port.
I think they have boxes that provide actuator control from rotor diseqc commands anyway which brings us back to including it.
Well, yes, but I'm cheap and I preferred to spend 5€ in components tucked inside the computer instead of buying a 100€ v-box, have another box laying around and having less control over the whole positioning process.
Bye
On 6/24/2010 1:37 AM, Luca Olivetti wrote:
It's a really simple out of tree module, you don't need to hack the kernel, just to compile the module and insmod it. It hasn't caused me any problem in the many years I have used it. BTW, the module uses a parallel port, and since these are becoming difficult to find, I wrote another, unreleased, one that uses a serial port (even an usb to serial adapter should work). Of course I'm not (still) using it in production, so it's not as tested as the one using the parallel port.
I looked on mine and while it doesn't have a port on the back, it does have a header on the board. If intel had their way, there'd be not floppy, parallel or serial ports on any new board :(. With a serial port, the data stream could be brought out to parallel giving you 8 pins.
Well, yes, but I'm cheap and I preferred to spend 5€ in components tucked inside the computer instead of buying a 100€ v-box, have another box laying around and having less control over the whole positioning process.
I'm cheap too, that's why I'm thinking about home made rotors moving cone antennas made of foam covered with foil and maybe fiberglass. Light so a faster rotor could be made, and 2-3 of those should be cheaper then an array of dishes, lnb's and switches. Plus cone antennas they say don't have the rain fade problem. Only problem I might run into is I want to do C-band also and while for Ku the cones end up being smaller then a dish, I'm hearing that to make it work on in c-band, the length is measured in yards instead of inches. We'll see.
Al 24/06/10 20:18, En/na Timothy D. Lenz ha escrit:
On 6/24/2010 1:37 AM, Luca Olivetti wrote:
It's a really simple out of tree module, you don't need to hack the kernel, just to compile the module and insmod it. It hasn't caused me any problem in the many years I have used it. BTW, the module uses a parallel port, and since these are becoming difficult to find, I wrote another, unreleased, one that uses a serial port (even an usb to serial adapter should work). Of course I'm not (still) using it in production, so it's not as tested as the one using the parallel port.
I looked on mine and while it doesn't have a port on the back, it does have a header on the board. If intel had their way, there'd be not floppy, parallel or serial ports on any new board :(. With a serial port, the data stream could be brought out to parallel giving you 8 pins.
My implementation doesn't use the data stream, it just uses the control pins of the serial port (RTS as rotate west output, DTR as rotate east output and CTS as the pulse counter input).
Bye
I mean any comunication between computer and device. Serial sends 8 bits at a time too, just have to decode/encode it out
On 6/24/2010 1:01 PM, Luca Olivetti wrote:
Al 24/06/10 20:18, En/na Timothy D. Lenz ha escrit:
On 6/24/2010 1:37 AM, Luca Olivetti wrote:
It's a really simple out of tree module, you don't need to hack the kernel, just to compile the module and insmod it. It hasn't caused me any problem in the many years I have used it. BTW, the module uses a parallel port, and since these are becoming difficult to find, I wrote another, unreleased, one that uses a serial port (even an usb to serial adapter should work). Of course I'm not (still) using it in production, so it's not as tested as the one using the parallel port.
I looked on mine and while it doesn't have a port on the back, it does have a header on the board. If intel had their way, there'd be not floppy, parallel or serial ports on any new board :(. With a serial port, the data stream could be brought out to parallel giving you 8 pins.
My implementation doesn't use the data stream, it just uses the control pins of the serial port (RTS as rotate west output, DTR as rotate east output and CTS as the pulse counter input).
Bye
While poking around on the net I found this old thread from 2004: http://www.linuxtv.org/mailinglists/vdr/2004/01-2004/msg00848.html
On Wednesday 30 June 2010 22:45:53 Timothy D. Lenz wrote:
While poking around on the net I found this old thread from 2004: http://www.linuxtv.org/mailinglists/vdr/2004/01-2004/msg00848.html
vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Hi,
I'm using patch for gotox with vdr and motor for a long time without problem. Original patch is from Seppo Ingalsuo is here - http://www.linuxtv.org/pipermail/vdr/2008-March/016164.html. Last version of patch is here (for vdr-1.7.13-1.7.15) - http://www.linuxtv.org/pipermail/vdr/2010-March/022561.html.
BR,
Ales
-
ajurik＠quick.cz -
Luca Olivetti -
Timothy D. Lenz -
VDR User