Thread: [kaffeine-user] Kaffeine and LCN (Logical Channel Number)
Brought to you by:
hftom,
lasselindqvist
From: Alfredo P. <alf...@gm...> - 2009-05-21 14:07:08
|
Hi there, In Italy, where I live, we're switching to DVB-T (analog TV is being shut down). For this reason I bought some set-top-boxes (STB) for my parents' TVs, and one DVB-T USB card for my computer. After frequency scan, my parents' STBs automatically assign channels the "right" number (like "Channel One" goes on 1, "Channel Two" on 2 and so on), while I can't get the same behaviour on Kaffeine: channels are ordered alphabetically. I browsed a bit, and found people talking about "Logical Channel Number" (LCN). 1) Is LCN something "hardcoded" in the STBs, or 2) is LCN information broadcast by the DVB-T providers? Is in any case possible to have this feature in Kaffeine, 1) by creating localized configuration files, or 2) by reading the LCN field from the DVB-T signal? Thank you very much for the support. (And of course Kaffeine rocks! ;-) ) Regards, Alfredo |
From: Alfredo P. <alf...@gm...> - 2009-05-21 14:13:33
|
If this can be of any help, I found this document about LCN (so it seems to be something standard...) http://www.dgtvi.it/stat/Allegati/Specifiche_LCN.pdf If extending kaffeine to support this feature requires some programming, I'm quite motivated and experienced (but not on QT or KDE libraries... sorry...). Please let me know. Alfredo On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 3:37 PM, Alfredo Pironti <alf...@gm...> wrote: > Hi there, > > In Italy, where I live, we're switching to DVB-T (analog TV is being > shut down). For this reason I bought some set-top-boxes (STB) for my > parents' TVs, and one DVB-T USB card for my computer. > > After frequency scan, my parents' STBs automatically assign channels > the "right" number (like "Channel One" goes on 1, "Channel Two" on 2 > and so on), while I can't get the same behaviour on Kaffeine: channels > are ordered alphabetically. > > I browsed a bit, and found people talking about "Logical Channel > Number" (LCN). 1) Is LCN something "hardcoded" in the STBs, or 2) is > LCN information broadcast by the DVB-T providers? Is in any case > possible to have this feature in Kaffeine, 1) by creating localized > configuration files, or 2) by reading the LCN field from the DVB-T > signal? > > Thank you very much for the support. (And of course Kaffeine rocks! ;-) ) > > Regards, > Alfredo > |
From: Christoph P. <chr...@gm...> - 2009-05-31 13:02:02
|
Hi, 2009/5/21 Alfredo Pironti <alf...@gm...>: > On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 3:37 PM, Alfredo Pironti > <alf...@gm...> wrote: >> Hi there, >> >> In Italy, where I live, we're switching to DVB-T (analog TV is being >> shut down). For this reason I bought some set-top-boxes (STB) for my >> parents' TVs, and one DVB-T USB card for my computer. >> >> After frequency scan, my parents' STBs automatically assign channels >> the "right" number (like "Channel One" goes on 1, "Channel Two" on 2 >> and so on), while I can't get the same behaviour on Kaffeine: channels >> are ordered alphabetically. >> >> I browsed a bit, and found people talking about "Logical Channel >> Number" (LCN). 1) Is LCN something "hardcoded" in the STBs, or 2) is >> LCN information broadcast by the DVB-T providers? Is in any case >> possible to have this feature in Kaffeine, 1) by creating localized >> configuration files, or 2) by reading the LCN field from the DVB-T >> signal? So ... as you found out, LCN seems to be part of the DVB-T data. >> Thank you very much for the support. (And of course Kaffeine rocks! ;-) ) >> >> Regards, >> Alfredo > > If this can be of any help, I found this document about LCN (so it > seems to be something standard...) > http://www.dgtvi.it/stat/Allegati/Specifiche_LCN.pdf > > If extending kaffeine to support this feature requires some > programming, I'm quite motivated and experienced (but not on QT or KDE > libraries... sorry...). Well, the problem is that those information is transmitted in a part that kaffeine doesn't look at. Of course it's possible to deal with LCN, the question is whether it's worth the effort (there is also the possibility of collisions: other countries might be using tag 0x83 (=private) for something else). How important is that number? I think that you normally identify a channel by its name, not by a number (but ok, there are exceptions). You can also manually assign numbers to the channels (if you absolutely don't like the order) and sort by number. > Please let me know. > > Alfredo Christoph |
From: Alfredo P. <alf...@gm...> - 2009-06-01 09:04:46
|
Hi, Christoph Pfister wrote: > Hi, > > Well, the problem is that those information is transmitted in a part > that kaffeine doesn't look at. Of course it's possible to deal with > LCN, the question is whether it's worth the effort (there is also the > possibility of collisions: other countries might be using tag 0x83 > (=private) for something else). How important is that number? I think > that you normally identify a channel by its name, not by a number (but > ok, there are exceptions). You can also manually assign numbers to the > channels (if you absolutely don't like the order) and sort by number. Probably my "need" arises because I'm trying to use kaffeine as a Set Top Box. In particular I use a remote where only digits are available, so channel numbering is quite important, and it's very boring to manually sort almost 100 channels. Besides the fact that MUX are changed quite often, so one has to re-do the job quite often. Maybe I'm just using kaffeine for the wrong puropose (for instance, program recording or egp scheduling is not supported via dcop/OSD...) Would you be interested in improving (maybe with my help?) that part of kaffeine? I find kaffeine much better than other alternatives, because it's easy to use and... it just works! (channel scan, adapter recognition and so on...) But maybe we can add a few features about the 10-foot user interface. Regards, Alfredo |
From: Christoph P. <chr...@gm...> - 2009-06-02 15:41:00
|
2009/6/1 Alfredo Pironti <alf...@gm...>: > Hi, > > Christoph Pfister wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Well, the problem is that those information is transmitted in a part >> that kaffeine doesn't look at. Of course it's possible to deal with >> LCN, the question is whether it's worth the effort (there is also the >> possibility of collisions: other countries might be using tag 0x83 >> (=private) for something else). How important is that number? I think >> that you normally identify a channel by its name, not by a number (but >> ok, there are exceptions). You can also manually assign numbers to the >> channels (if you absolutely don't like the order) and sort by number. > > Probably my "need" arises because I'm trying to use kaffeine as a Set > Top Box. In particular I use a remote where only digits are available, > so channel numbering is quite important, and it's very boring to > manually sort almost 100 channels. Besides the fact that MUX are changed > quite often, so one has to re-do the job quite often. In what way are those LCNs less arbitrary than Kaffeine's autonumbering? > Maybe I'm just using kaffeine for the wrong puropose (for instance, > program recording or egp scheduling is not supported via dcop/OSD...) Kaffeine isn't a media center (and wasn't designed as such). But I don't mind taking steps into that direction ... > Would you be interested in improving (maybe with my help?) that part of > kaffeine? I find kaffeine much better than other alternatives, because > it's easy to use and... it just works! (channel scan, adapter > recognition and so on...) But maybe we can add a few features about the > 10-foot user interface. The time I can dedicate to development is likely the limiting factor :) - but I do appreciate new ideas (for example I don't use a remote control and I can't know everything anyway ...), so you have to be a bit patient. Anyway, I'll think a bite more about LCN ... > Regards, > Alfredo Christoph |
From: Alfredo P. <alf...@gm...> - 2009-06-04 08:11:51
|
Christoph Pfister wrote: > 2009/6/1 Alfredo Pironti <alf...@gm...>: >> Hi, >> >> Christoph Pfister wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Well, the problem is that those information is transmitted in a part >>> that kaffeine doesn't look at. Of course it's possible to deal with >>> LCN, the question is whether it's worth the effort (there is also the >>> possibility of collisions: other countries might be using tag 0x83 >>> (=private) for something else). How important is that number? I think >>> that you normally identify a channel by its name, not by a number (but >>> ok, there are exceptions). You can also manually assign numbers to the >>> channels (if you absolutely don't like the order) and sort by number. >> Probably my "need" arises because I'm trying to use kaffeine as a Set >> Top Box. In particular I use a remote where only digits are available, >> so channel numbering is quite important, and it's very boring to >> manually sort almost 100 channels. Besides the fact that MUX are changed >> quite often, so one has to re-do the job quite often. > > In what way are those LCNs less arbitrary than Kaffeine's autonumbering? At least in Italy, we have about 10 "institutional" channels, that every citizen stores in the same program number (and they are correctly handled by LCN here). It's like for an English guy to store BBC1 on program 1, BBC2 on program 2 and so on. The other 80 channels I agree are almost "randomly" assigned to program numbers, even by LCN. Probably, the problem would be definitely solved if I could group channels (say by using mouse and keyboard), and then switch channel groups from my remote (currently not supported). I see you can create new "categories" in kaffeine, but I don't think they exactly work as "channel groups", am I right, or am I missing something? > >> Maybe I'm just using kaffeine for the wrong puropose (for instance, >> program recording or egp scheduling is not supported via dcop/OSD...) > > Kaffeine isn't a media center (and wasn't designed as such). But I > don't mind taking steps into that direction ... > >> Would you be interested in improving (maybe with my help?) that part of >> kaffeine? I find kaffeine much better than other alternatives, because >> it's easy to use and... it just works! (channel scan, adapter >> recognition and so on...) But maybe we can add a few features about the >> 10-foot user interface. > > The time I can dedicate to development is likely the limiting factor > :) - but I do appreciate new ideas (for example I don't use a remote > control and I can't know everything anyway ...), so you have to be a > bit patient. Anyway, I'll think a bite more about LCN ... If you can confirm you are willing to include such features in kaffeine (mostly set-top-box ones rather than LCN), I can start programming something and send patches back to you. The real thing preventing me to have already started, is that I didn't want to put effort in programming features that would never be included in trunk (and I don't even consider to fork kaffeine!). Of course we can discuss on design and so on, but at least we should agree whether we want them or not ;-) Alfredo > >> Regards, >> Alfredo > > Christoph > |
From: Christoph P. <chr...@gm...> - 2009-06-12 22:10:03
|
[ sorry for the late reply :/ ] 2009/6/4 Alfredo Pironti <alf...@gm...>: <snip> > At least in Italy, we have about 10 "institutional" channels, that every > citizen stores in the same program number (and they are correctly > handled by LCN here). It's like for an English guy to store BBC1 on > program 1, BBC2 on program 2 and so on. The other 80 channels I agree > are almost "randomly" assigned to program numbers, even by LCN. > > Probably, the problem would be definitely solved if I could group > channels (say by using mouse and keyboard), and then switch channel > groups from my remote (currently not supported). I see you can create > new "categories" in kaffeine, but I don't think they exactly work as > "channel groups", am I right, or am I missing something? Okay, this sounds like an interesting idea. So the ability to switch between those "groups" with a remote control is a key point? (hmm, and then the numbering would likely have to be on a per-group basis, so that you can have a channel "1" in group A and a different channel "1" in group B?) > If you can confirm you are willing to include such features in kaffeine > (mostly set-top-box ones rather than LCN), I can start programming > something and send patches back to you. The real thing preventing me to > have already started, is that I didn't want to put effort in programming > features that would never be included in trunk (and I don't even > consider to fork kaffeine!). Of course we can discuss on design and so > on, but at least we should agree whether we want them or not ;-) Agreed, coordination is needed. And yes, I do think that making Kaffeine more rc-friendly is a worthwhile and achievable goal ... So if you're interested, you should try kaffeine 1.0-pre1 - you will for example recognise that the dvb category feature is missing there, so it could be a starting point ... ;-) > Alfredo Christoph |