diff mbox

[ANNOUNCE] vdr-autosort-0.0.6

Message ID 437A5E4E.60408@gmx.de
State New
Headers

Commit Message

Frank Scherthan Nov. 15, 2005, 10:16 p.m. UTC 
  CopyPoint schrieb:
> 
>   ...first steps to usability...
> 
> http://www.copypointburscheid.de/linux/vdr-autosort-0.0.6.tgz
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 2005-11-14: Version 0.0.6
> 
> - Added a Setup Menu (described in README)
> - Added multi-level OSD-Messages to let you know whats going on
> - You can reload config and start a complete AutoSort-Run from mainmenu,
>     but VDR is unusable for this time (20min here).
>                  !!! USE WITH CARE !!
> - Housekeeping will be interrupted by any remote key now
> - Implemented 'SetCaFF' and 'SetCa0'. You need the patch to delete Ca
> special values (autosort will tell you)
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> I hope it's a bit more comfortable now.

Yes! It is :)

There are still 3 warnings, nothing to care to much about
:
g++ -O2 -Wall -Woverloaded-virtual -c -D_GNU_SOURCE
-DPLUGIN_NAME_I18N='"autosort"' -I../../../include
-I/usr/src/linux/include autosort.c
autosort.c: In member function 'void cNewAutoSort::CheckDelimiters()':
autosort.c:929: warning: suggest parentheses around assignment used as
truth value
autosort.c:952: warning: suggest parentheses around assignment used as
truth value
autosort.c:974: warning: suggest parentheses around assignment used as
truth value

Happens with
g++ (GCC) 4.0.3 20051023 (prerelease) (Debian 4.0.2-3)

Attached a patch to get rid of the warnings...

Frank

Comments

CopyPoint Nov. 16, 2005, 8:56 a.m. UTC | #1 
>There are still 3 warnings, nothing to care to much about
Yes, and so i did. Applied it yesterday eavening to 007.
I just wanna know why my gcc 3.3 eats this, while 2.95 and 4.0 are 
complaining about?
Thanks again


Some quests for your freq-filter:
   Is one value enough or do you need a list?
   Is Polarization also needed?
   Is there a more human-readable way than 'HasFreq=123456'?
   Anything else i should think about?


         Thorsten
Frank Scherthan Nov. 16, 2005, 5:46 p.m. UTC | #2 
CopyPoint schrieb:
> 
>> There are still 3 warnings, nothing to care to much about
> 
> Yes, and so i did. Applied it yesterday eavening to 007.
> I just wanna know why my gcc 3.3 eats this, while 2.95 and 4.0 are
> complaining about?
I really don't know...and for me the parentheses seem to be
unnessasary...but at least the compiler shuts up.

> Some quests for your freq-filter:
>   Is one value enough or do you need a list?
>   Is Polarization also needed?
>   Is there a more human-readable way than 'HasFreq=123456'?
>   Anything else i should think about?
Sorry, I only wanted sorting by freq. I don't need/want a HasFreq to
filter by. I think that was my fault, as I wrote I want to filter for
freq. :(

Just a simple sorting by freq would by fine. There are usually never 2
transponder with the same freq and diffrent polarisations on the same
satelitite...

I really would like this feature, but as I found a patch that allows
sorting by freq in the channels-view, I could live without this feature,
too. Just give this feature a low priority...

The new autosort is really great. I love the TEST-NEW-CONFIG - Button! :)

Frank
CopyPoint Nov. 17, 2005, 2 p.m. UTC | #3 
At 18:46 16.11.05 +0100, you wrote:

>I really would like this feature, but as I found a patch that allows
>sorting by freq in the channels-view,

Yep, this should happen here.

>I could live without this feature,
>too. Just give this feature a low priority...

I'll drop it if no other requests this.

         Thorsten
diff mbox

Patch

diff -Naur autosort-0.0.6/autosort.c autosort-0.0.6_orig/autosort.c
--- autosort-0.0.6/autosort.c	2005-11-15 21:12:22.000000000 +0100
+++ autosort-0.0.6_orig/autosort.c	2005-11-15 23:13:35.000000000 +0100
@@ -926,7 +926,7 @@ 
     if (messageLevel >= 1) Skins.Message(mtStatus,"AutoSort: Check for missing Group Delimiters", messageTime);
     group = AutoGroups.GetFirstByOrder();    
     bool foundNext;
-    while (group = AutoGroups.GetNextByOrder(group->OIdx())){
+    while ((group = AutoGroups.GetNextByOrder(group->OIdx()))){
       foundNext = false;
       for (cChannel *channel = Channels.Get(Channels.GetNextGroup(firstGroupChIdx)); (channel && !foundNext); channel = Channels.Get(Channels.GetNextGroup(channel->Index()))) 
         {
@@ -949,7 +949,7 @@ 
       {      
       foundNext = false;
       group = AutoGroups.GetFirstByOrder();    
-      while (group = AutoGroups.GetNextByOrder(group->OIdx())){
+      while ((group = AutoGroups.GetNextByOrder(group->OIdx()))){
         if (strcmp(channel->Name(),group->Name()) == 0) 
           {
           foundNext = true;
@@ -971,7 +971,7 @@ 
     cAutoGroup *nextGroup = group;
     cChannel *channel = Channels.Get(group->GetChIndex());
 
-    while (nextGroup = AutoGroups.GetNextByOrder(group->OIdx())){
+    while ((nextGroup = AutoGroups.GetNextByOrder(group->OIdx()))){
       channel = Channels.Get(Channels.GetNextGroup(group->GetChIndex()));
       if (!strcmp(channel->Name(),nextGroup->Name())){
         group = nextGroup;