Thema: SmartDVB 0.3.0 RC

[Jürgen]

After reaching the switch frequency 1170000, I am getting mostly a "no signal" message on 0192. For 11670 H and 11686V on Astra I got the same channels for some reason

Nothing like this happening here.
So perhaps this may depend on hardware, like device file and settings used.

. Unusual characters in channnel names also appear. Any idea?

I have mentioned this before, in a slightly different context:

It's not just I>TELE at 11817 V 27500 19.2°E, but also several stations on 11523 H 27500 there, that come with ? in the station name captures.
And on 12148 H 27500 you can find even more strange station names like
†DELUXE‡ MUSIC
Such characters / symbols are not illegal for file names, but I am wondering, if those should be there at all.

Suppose such nasty elements should be changed to _ normally.

So, possibly solving issues with nasty characters in station name captures may indeed be the next step to go...

An important detail:
Such symbols are not only to be found at the beginning of a name, but also at any other position, but then always between words, as it seems.

Just compared with my receiver, rescanned 12148 H 27500 and got DELUXE MUSIC, not †DELUXE‡ MUSIC, and with no leading space or nonsense and just one space between the words, nothing else.
Terratec Home Cinema Basic, the original soft for my sat tuner, also does not show that nasty symbols. Just rescanned 12148 H 27500 there, to make sure.

Best regards

Jürgen

[jackjavo]

@d*d*: didn't this scan prob occur with previous 030 tst versions? (assuming bda.dev is selected module? please make sure of that coz bdas.dev would be more inclined to have issues with lofs. If bda.dev is indeed selected what r the exact settings there, direct tuning enabled perhaps etc etc?). These unusual characters u mention also didn´t apper at previous 0.2.5?

ok odd chrs issue will be looked at, should be simple nuff...

br,
jack

[dada]

Hi Jack,
just did a direct comparison with 0.25 and 30-11. Device : Tevii at bda.dev. Settings: 8psk default; tuning: standard; s2: not defined; committed diseqc: LNB + Reg params. Default timeouts for scanning increased by 2-fold. Scanning with 0.25 is smooth and quick. With 30-11 faulty at low lof, mostly no signal at high lof. Then took the 0.25 sdvb.db and put it in 30-11. Funny result: sometimes only channels below 117000 work and sometimes only those above. I vaguely remember that I did this also in the beginning using the first 0.3 without noticing a problem there.
br, dada
I forgot: don't see unusual characters in 0.25

[jackjavo]

@d*d*: cud u try also the bda.dev from 0.2.5 with 0.3.0 sdvb .exe? There r some alterations to bda.dev concerning signal detection, although for tevii i don't think this should matter a lot coz that uses tevii.dll library which has it's own signal detect routines, so odd. If you alter bda.dev settings (there r some new settings there also concerning signal detection). I presume tevii is correct selected at settings etc? And ur tt shows the same also?
btw: odd chrs issue indeed's introduced issue, already fixed...
edit: i'm sending u url with current bda.dev build, just to make sure...

[dada]

just quick answer, yes, the TT shows the same behavior. Will test the bda.dev tonight. Need to work now.

[Jürgen]

Spooky, isn't it?
I am having issues with bda.dev as well, some effecting the sat tuner only.

Well, I am really happy to see, jackjavo is willing to locate and fix any possible bugs precisely.

This is a very big difference to Prog, who tortured us with quick and dirty hot fixes for years, never ever doing a real repair and removing a bug to solve a problem, but always just trying to just bypass or cover it somehow.
So in fact ProgDVB should still have a version number far below 1.0, whereas SmartSDVB 0.25 could already have been called 2.x in comparison...

Due to half way known recent installer issues, I decided to continue testing 0.3 after a completely fresh install, as some corruption may have happened here.
After an intensive clean up, of course.

As I am quite busy right now, this may have to wait for a day or two.  
I won't touch SmartDVB 0.2.5 on the other machine now, as that one is my proven working fall back system.
The coming up third one waits until I can avail an SSD for it...

Best regards

Jürgen

[dada]

Yes, Jürgen, I did exactly the same. I have a very safe 0.25 running, and complete fresh install of 0.3 to play around with. And I agree completely on the Prog issue!

[dada]

Hello Jack,
tested previous bda.dev now with 0.3 and both cards: same problem. the lof change at 117000 does not seem to happen reliably. To me it seems to be related to 0.3 therefore because there is no problem whatsoever in this respect with 0.2.5. In addition, there ist, at least here, a noticable difference between 0.25 and 0.3 with the same bda.dev (from 0.3). 0.3 is slower and claims more "no signal" transponders.

[jackjavo]

ok d*d* tx for the tsts. I've sent u update with bda/bdas/exe. About bdas i think i located bug which might have lead to problems (i could actually reproduce the issues somewhat here, at least it worked unreliable for me too, which for me altered when enabling the bdas/settings 'use tif/multiplexer'.

About the bda issues, still somewhat unclear for me, but cud you also look at this. Is it only unreliable with the scanner at various lofs? (ie when you actually tune the station you have reliable tunes with bda.dev?). I think the problem might lie with some minor alterations i made to the scanner recently to try to increase speed there. I could have located the tevii issue, but not sure about the tt which uses the more general signal measure code (which i also use nd seems reliable to me). So question is do the issues only seem to arrise with the scanner nd not normal tune (that would be kinda logical to me then nd narrow down the search)?
Anyhow i'm sending u current build like mentioned.

br,
jack

[yvmifi]

@ jackjavo

0.3 recognizes not sr 29700. in Tranponderliste sr 29700 is good ,but in 0.3 is 27500, the transponders of the D +

I have as the others, installed over 0.25, and now 0.3 works only once. direct installation for me not work>>>crash


yvmifi

[yvmifi]

Scan transponder is very good!!!

[Jürgen]

@ yvmifi

On that second picture, the nasty symbols in the station names seem to have been gone.
Did this happen on the transponder scan you've just made?

Auf dem zweiten Bild sind die seltsamen Symbole in den Stationsnamen weg.
Kam das jetzt so beim Transponderscan raus?

[yvmifi]

@ Jürgen

Ja ich habe die Astra Satelitenliste gelöscht, dann Sendersuchlauf, hat auch jetzt die sr 29700 erkannt, nach meiner meinung alle Sender gefunden
und die komischen Zeichen sind weg. jackjavo hat mir eine neue SmartDVB.exe und neue BDA und BDAS geschickt.

Nur eins, ich habe den 0.3 über einen 0.25 drüber installiert.

Eine eigenstädige Installation crascht nach Sendersuchlauf.

Ich werde heute Abend mal versuchen eine neue Installation  zu machen und bevor ich einen Sendersuchlauf mache die neue SmartDVB.exe und BDA reinzulegen.

[jackjavo]

@jrgen: just tb clear, i shud also have sent u same like yv*
@yvm*: those exceptions u had i think r related to the new custom list, so new install should not make much difference (but more list updates etc ofcoz when save new chns at first sc*n after install ofcourse etc). And some other testers here perhaps don't eve use new list. Maybe i should make legacy tree list view default at new installs?
Anyhow current bda.dev/sc*n issues r much more important to resolve atm so i'll concentrate at that for now...
br..

[ritschibie]

Hello @all

I've just finished my tests with sdvb 0311. Multirecording with CI/CAM/Card is working but 2nd and 3rd recording are in a crypted stream that won't let you do video editing or play the streams with VLC, etc.. So ATM multirecording with CAM/Card is still a working place. The shutdown procedure with time programming via the options button right next to the recording button is not working in my config even with jackjavo's workaround given in post #54.

Installation/Setup method seems to be a critical process. Setup gives you 2 choices: the first one installs sdvb so that you can use it without admin rights, the second requires admin rights. Whereas the first option installs under "user/username/Appdata/Local" a 2nd smartdvb directory (which is critical for all functions of the program) the one with compulsary admin rights installs itself without installing a "twin" directory" in the "user" directory (dada seems to have chosen this kind of install). If program behaviour differs according to the install process, I don't know. I had chosen the option 1 install method.

One thing in this test reporting looks very disturbing to me: There seem to be different sdvb versions out here in the public. As long as I cannot read a distinct number wirth the version (like the one I had was the 0311) I cannot differentiate the output of these tests. So either:
- jackjavo writes here the version of the beta pack he's sending out (i.e. 0315 for example) or
- people testing refer to such a version number .
I would prefer when people reporting about results would declare their beta version number. If not, I think the tracing for bug elimination becomes very difficult!

rg

Ritchie