[patch] EIT decoder problem

[Christophe Massiot]

At 19:53 +0200 9/04/07, Johann Hanne wrote:

>thanks for the hint. The segment_last_section_number paragraph was indeed what
>I was missing, I think I now understand what's going on. However, I really
>don't know why it's done this way, and why it only applies to the EIT. If we
>miss a single segment now (and on my test transponder a segment only consists
>of one section), there is *zero* chance to detect that error. One could count
>the sections and make a new callback if the number of sections grows while
>the version number stays the same, but this would make the code even more
>confusing...

It is probably done that way because segments are compiled from 
several channels of the same transponder. One could want to allocate 
a "segment" to every channel, always with the same section numbers, 
but in case a channel is missing that would make a hole unless you 
reconfigure the other EIT generators.

>I've attached a new patch which should be ok now. Please apply if you don't
>have any more objections.

I have left the old test for completion (checking that we have all 
sections) so that we are still compatible with the old behaviour. It 
is still true that the table is complete if we have all sections, and 
removing the test would have caused a delay of one section in the 
detection of a new EIT.

>BTW, I'd be happy if you could release a 0.1.6 now, there are quite a few bugs
>fixed compared to 0.1.5. I have a rather complex application using PAT, PMT,
>SDT and EIT and it's working fine with latest SVN, so I'd like to sync with a
>release version.

I'm quite for a new version of libdvbpsi, but usually I ask for sam's 
opinion on it ?

-- 
Christophe Massiot.

-- 
This is the libdvbpsi-devel mailing-list, see http://developers.videolan.org/
To unsubscribe, go to: http://developers.videolan.org/lists.html