French DVB-T Channel IDs vs. EIT Channel IDs

Patrick Boettcher <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.vdr
Message-ID <20180225152621.75458a81@yaise-pc1>
Hi list,

since some time (1-2 years) I noticed that the DVB-T channels do not
show EPG anymore. I'm not sure what is the root-cause: either it
was the migration of French DVB-T to HD (in 2016) or an update of VDR.

Anyway, this morning I took the time to figure out what is wrong and
here is what I found. 

In short, the channel-ID generated from the one received in the EIT
does not correspond to a known channel-ID from the channel list, and
VDR drops the whole section:

In cEIT::cEIT (from eit.c) we see

  tChannelID channelID(Source, getOriginalNetworkId(), getTransportStreamId(), getServiceId());
  cChannel *Channel = Channels->GetByChannelID(channelID, true);

and channel is NULL in my case.

I added some debug prints to GetByChannelID() in the search loop:

  printf("sid: %d == %d, %s, %s %d\n", 
         Channel->Sid(), 
         sid,
         (const char *)ChannelID.ToString(),
         (const char *)Channel->GetChannelID().ToString(),
         Channel->GetChannelID() == ChannelID);

And here is an example of what I get:

  sid: 517 == 517, T-8442-2-517, T-0-506-517 0

The internal channel ID of vdr reads T-0-506-517. 517 is the SID, 506
is the radio-channel frequency in MHz. This is the right internal
channel for this EIT-section.

The EIT-channel-ID is telling me that 8442 is the original network ID
and 2 might be the radio-channel ID.

I tweaked the operator==() of ChannelID to make it work, but not in a
contributable manner. 

How should this be fixed correctly?

Is this a regression introduced somewhere?

Can it be solved by configuration?

Thanks for any help.

best regards,
--
Patrick.













_______________________________________________
vdr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.