97 replies to this topic

[Dimitrij]

Use PC editor.e.g. E-Chanelizer, don't use enigma2 parental control...

 

Many users have used it before.
You have deprived them of such a possibility.
I offered to compromise with the patch.

But...
What do you mean hard?
And what then is not difficult?
I see only one reason for the refusal .

 

Sorry,topic closed.

Edited by Dimitrij, 5 January 2016 - 06:37.

[Dimitrij]

P.S."Load unlinked userbouquets" not hard?

[littlesat]

Many uses used it before should change to numbered markers as that was the intended way to do what they want and also for years...You asking us for re-opening their work-a-round they used for years, which was not required at all...(because some settings editor did not support numbered markers). With e-channelizer this is really not required anymore.

 

As I said months before we are not planning to put this work-a-round back as simply it is a work-a-round.... Let them used numbered markers instead in case "fillers" are needed....

Edited by littlesat, 5 January 2016 - 07:46.

[Dimitrij]

Hidden services PC editor for myself.

I do not want to see some services.
I do not need parental control and not need "Unhide parental control services".
It has worked for many, many years.
And my patch does not hurt You.

Edited by Dimitrij, 5 January 2016 - 07:50.

[littlesat]

The unlinked userbouquet is not hard... it finally shows those who mess up with settings and do not understand what they are doing the unlinked user bouquets... and it is smart.... you can use standard downloaded settings and keep your own favorites on top....

 

But those who mess up with their channel list did also mess up with this smart feature....!!!! Simply as they do not understand what they are doing and how they in fact should work-a-round this feature.

 

In addition on this point an improvement is under investigation.... (once a del file of a userbouquet is present, then this user bouquet will not be reloaded when there is also a file without the del - this also avoids autofastscan/cablescan will not "hurt" anymore)

Edited by littlesat, 5 January 2016 - 08:01.

[littlesat]

I do not want to see some services. -> Then you remove it from your settings...... This has the same effect.... So no added value at all!!!

 

Hide services was a left over from parental control in E1... in E2 it had the same effect as simply deleting the service as in E2 blacklists/whitelists were introduced....

 

I can not help that you missused this feature for years..... 

 

WIth parental control you have the capability to show them afterwards....

 

Your are using a work-a-round and ask us to work-a-round in the code... why not using parental control instead as your work-a-round.... which side effects does that has for you? I suggest nothing? Not seeing services is all what parental lock is about.... and with a backup of the blacklist you get also these channels easily blocked again... and without modifying the lamedb with an editor. 

 

Note (and sorry) that your patch hurts.... as it is something added without added value... and it makes stuff more complicated as required.... for the intend.... a work-a-round....

Edited by littlesat, 5 January 2016 - 07:59.

[Rob van der Does]

I do not want to see some services. -> Then you remove it from your settings...... This has the same effect.... So no added value at all!!!

That is not correct. In many cases the automated backgroundscan will bring those services back.

This is even a common reason for many to disable the backgroundscan (which in itself has been discouraged by PLi).

[littlesat]

That is not correct. In many cases the automated backgroundscan will bring those services back. -> Not when they are in the blacklist with parental lock...

 

But I'm always thinking with you... (and that sometimes needs time)....

 

Another solution that is much much better is adding a new 'hidden' flag and name it parental_lock flag... in parental lock set this new flag instead of the hidden flag and when checking to hide services also check for the parental lock flag... And during loading the bouquets clear the parental lock flag instead of the hidden flag.

 

Then you do not need to do checks on configs (which is in fact a work-a-round) and it may run smoother and it could be accepted... And the hiding for parental lock is then really a "new" added feature and there is no mix between them. You have clearly two features next to each other...

 

I hope you understand what i mean here????

 

How does that sound?

 

I think I can accept a patch where a new parental_lock flag is added.... (bit firstly only the flag added - nothing else).

 

P.S. I used hidden flag for parental lock as I thought this flag was never used.... And in E2 in fact it was never used. I did not know some used it as tricky work-a-round for something....

Edited by littlesat, 5 January 2016 - 09:01.

[Dimitrij]

Please simply apply my patch and you will see that everyone will be happy.
Nothing is broken.
Your ideas will work as before.
And I will continue to work on improving parent control.
 

Please !

Edited by Dimitrij, 5 January 2016 - 10:59.

[littlesat]

No....!!!!  It is really note done to let this depend on parental control in use...

 

Please add a parental locked flag next to the hidden flag.... That is even much more simpler approach and you do not mix-and-depend features.... .. You get the old stuff back as it was before and the parental control hide feature is not mixing up with it anymore...

 

This has also added value that your ideas are working next to parental control and in addition you can mix them.... (use them together). I think my latest suggestion is the real thing we want....

Edited by littlesat, 5 January 2016 - 11:30.

[littlesat]

e.g. start with in /lib/dvb/idvb.h...

 

enum

{

dxNoSDT=1,    // don't get SDT

dxDontshow=2,

dxNoDVB=4,  // dont use PMT for this service ( use cached pids )

dxHoldName=8,

dxNewFound=64,

dxIsDedicated3D=128,

dxIsParentalProtected=256,

};

 

bool usePMT() const { return !(m_flags & dxNoDVB); }

bool isHidden() const { return (m_flags & dxDontshow || m_flags & dxIsParentalProtected); }

 

--------------------------------------------

 

and in db.cpp

 

/ eDebug("[eDVBDB] %c ... %s", p, v.c_str());

if (p == 'p')

s->m_provider_name=v;

else if (p == 'f')

{

sscanf(v.c_str(), "%x", &s->m_flags);

s->m_flags &= ~eDVBService::dxIsParentalProtected;

Edited by littlesat, 5 January 2016 - 11:38.

[Dimitrij]

It's a great idea.

+

And I will continue to work on improving parent control?

[littlesat]

Sorry we do not blindly accept everything, but I think we can keep a stronger image when we think twice or three times before simply merging something...

 

Can you also (help me) finishing my idea? 

 

What do you want to improve on parental control...? The only thing I miss is hide a userbouquet when it is on the blacklist........

Edited by littlesat, 5 January 2016 - 12:58.

[Dimitrij]

 

 

Can you also (help me) finishing my idea? 

 

 

Yes.

improve:

1)hide userbouquet

2)blacklist editor(add/remove  services/bouquets/movie?)

Edited by Dimitrij, 5 January 2016 - 14:41.

[littlesat]

Nice plan.... you know how movies (MKV's) are flagged rename with . (dot) at the start...

 

I have now/soon work on VU4K so not many time on this subject...

Edited by littlesat, 5 January 2016 - 15:01.

[littlesat]

@dimitrij,

 

Is it possible you offer us a patch with the additional  dxIsParentalProtected flag.... this for speeding things up. At this moment my build environmont is stuck and I need to compile cpp here.......

[Dimitrij]

@dimitrij,

 

Is it possible you offer us a patch with the additional  dxIsParentalProtected flag.... this for speeding things up. At this moment my build environmont is stuck and I need to compile cpp here.......

Yes, I'll do a patch the weekend.

Edited by Dimitrij, 6 January 2016 - 07:37.

[littlesat]

Thanks!!! 

[Dimitrij]

done

https://github.com/O...nigma2/pull/165

[SayyiD]

Good approach!

As far as I understand, the new dxIsParentalProtected flag is applied "internally" in the parental setup.

 

What should I consider to support your approach when reading and writing settings in E-Channelizer?

Should the new flag be applied when hiding services 'dxDontshow' or adding services to the blacklist?