[linux-dvb] New tuning file for Astra 28.2E
christophpfister at gmail.com
Sun Aug 5 17:26:14 CEST 2007
Am Mittwoch, 25. Juli 2007 13:46 schrieb Marvin Hankley:
> > > So, I made the complete list. I
> > > know scan is capable of detecting other transponders from a smaller
> > > number but do we lose anything from having a more complete list than
> > > is strictly necessary?
> > The problem arises when some of them become invalid because you get
> > timeouts then. It's also a bit more difficult to maintain them (but
> > that's the case anyway ;) - hmm, will see and think a bit about this ...
> > the main issue remains: where to get an authoritative source of
> > information?
> Right, that is a problem, so I guess there must be some balance
> between receiving timeouts on one hand and not receiving the full list
> of channels on the other hand. Personally, I'd be slightly inclined
> towards enabling users to get the full list of channels. I'd think
> re-scanning is not something people are going to do too often, so
> perhaps if it might potentially take a little longer, that could be a
> price worth paying, in order to get the full list of channels?
> Another potential good use for a complete list is when searching for
> feeds. These transponders tend to be only used occasionally and I
> doubt they will appear in NITs. So, I suspect that the only way of
> detecting these channels will be to manually scan the transponder
> Given all that, these are just text files in some obscure corner of
> the filesystem. My full list containing all the transponders from the
> four satellites at 28.2E was only 4 Kb, so perhaps it might be
> feasible to ship _two_ channel lists, where available? A minimal
> starter file and, where available, a more complete list?
> I'm not aware of any authoritative source of information. What I used
> to produce my list was a combination of two internet sites,
> http://www.lyngsat.com/ and http://en.kingofsat.net/ (another good one
> is http://www.satcodx.com/ ), and then verifying those against the
> satellite itself.
Right, so I'll apply your file (as there is no better option I can think of).
Hmm, maybe a small tool that helps people to check whether their scan file is
still ok or to actually produce a valid&correct scan file (from another scan
file or whatever) would be feasible - let's see ... (this should simplify
users to deal with that stuff so that more involvement is possible in cases
where no authoritative source of information exists).
More information about the linux-dvb