Mailing List Archive: atrpms: users

Questions about MythTV 0.22 Packages

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

jrw3319 at gmail

Oct 20, 2009, 12:00 PM

Post #1 of 9 (1250 views)
Permalink

Questions about MythTV 0.22 Packages

Over the weekend I decided to take the plunge and upgrade my MythTV
back-end and front-end systems to version 0.22 from the
'atrpms-testing' repo. All went well, but I've come up with a couple
of questions:

1) VDPAU - I had previously played around a little bit with VDPAU on
one of my front-end systems using the 'bijou' packages, and was
generally impressed. I experienced a little bit of "tearing" during
playback, but overall it was OK, and CPU usage was pretty impressive.
I had hoped that with VDPAU entering the mainstream with 0.22 that
when I upgraded I would see at least as good, if not better, playback
/ performance, but unfortunately that's not the case for me. Playback
with VDPAU enabled now seems "fuzzy" and sometimes looks almost like
it is slightly in slow-motion. CPU usage is definitely better with
VDPAU enabled than without, but I'm not sure it matches what I was
seeing with the 'bijou' packages. This could certainly be a
configuration issue on my part, and I know this is more of a
MythTV-list question, but before I post there I wanted to ask here if
the 0.22 packages in testing are equal to the 0.22 RC release, or are
they based on some pre-RC level that may be causing issues with VDPAU?

2) libmyth Packages - On my MythTV back-end system I had installed the
'bijou' packages for the HDHR multi-rec capabilities. Because the
'regular' 0.21 packages in the stable repo eventually superseded the
'bijou' packages I had been blocking 'yum' from upgraded the MythTV
packages on this system. I thought this would be taken care of when I
upgraded to 0.22, but when I went to install the 0.22 packages yum
still wanted to install the latest 0.21 'libmyth' packages. I blocked
these packages and upgraded to 0.22 without any issues (at least none
that I am aware of yet), however now even when I run a regular 'yum
update' on this system it still wants to install/upgrade the 0.21
'libmyth' packages. Any one have any ideas what's going on here?

3) Latest NVidia Packages - Not specifically a MythTV 0.22 question,
but somewhat related, especially with regards to VDPAU. I'm having
problems figuring out what the latest NVidia packages are currently
available through ATrpms. I see some 190.36 packages in the stable
repo, but I also see some 190.36 packages available in the bleeding
repo. There was also a thread on this list a couple of days ago that
seemed to indicate the 190.40 (the official RC from NVidia) driver
would soon be available, but it hasn't shown up yet, at least not from
what I can tell. So, if I want the "latest and greatest" packages
which ones should I be using? Am I just being too impatient on the
190.40 packages?

Any help would be appreciated.

John

_______________________________________________
atrpms-users mailing list
atrpms-users [at] atrpms
http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users

judithc at bigpond

Oct 20, 2009, 2:37 PM

Post #2 of 9 (1193 views)
Permalink

Re: Questions about MythTV 0.22 Packages [In reply to]

John,

From what I can see 0.22-fixes branch of mythtv is improving very rapidly
with fixes every few hours.

revision 22547 is this mornings fixes

RC1 eas released at revision 22453

atrpms bleeding was from before that at revision 22186

As you can see bleeding is a fair way behind and probably has many issues
already fixed.

I am creating rpms for my own systems from svn nightly and installing them
on my RHEL5.3 x86_64 and i386 as they seem to be better each day.

I'm finding 0.22 is a great step forward and the menus are noticibly
faster.

regards
Stephen Collier

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Welch" <jrw3319 [at] gmail>
To: "ATrpms user list" <atrpms-users [at] atrpms>
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 6:00 AM
Subject: [ATrpms-users] Questions about MythTV 0.22 Packages

> Over the weekend I decided to take the plunge and upgrade my MythTV
> back-end and front-end systems to version 0.22 from the
> 'atrpms-testing' repo. All went well, but I've come up with a couple
> of questions:
>
> 1) VDPAU - I had previously played around a little bit with VDPAU on
> one of my front-end systems using the 'bijou' packages, and was
> generally impressed. I experienced a little bit of "tearing" during
> playback, but overall it was OK, and CPU usage was pretty impressive.
> I had hoped that with VDPAU entering the mainstream with 0.22 that
> when I upgraded I would see at least as good, if not better, playback
> / performance, but unfortunately that's not the case for me. Playback
> with VDPAU enabled now seems "fuzzy" and sometimes looks almost like
> it is slightly in slow-motion. CPU usage is definitely better with
> VDPAU enabled than without, but I'm not sure it matches what I was
> seeing with the 'bijou' packages. This could certainly be a
> configuration issue on my part, and I know this is more of a
> MythTV-list question, but before I post there I wanted to ask here if
> the 0.22 packages in testing are equal to the 0.22 RC release, or are
> they based on some pre-RC level that may be causing issues with VDPAU?
>
> 2) libmyth Packages - On my MythTV back-end system I had installed the
> 'bijou' packages for the HDHR multi-rec capabilities. Because the
> 'regular' 0.21 packages in the stable repo eventually superseded the
> 'bijou' packages I had been blocking 'yum' from upgraded the MythTV
> packages on this system. I thought this would be taken care of when I
> upgraded to 0.22, but when I went to install the 0.22 packages yum
> still wanted to install the latest 0.21 'libmyth' packages. I blocked
> these packages and upgraded to 0.22 without any issues (at least none
> that I am aware of yet), however now even when I run a regular 'yum
> update' on this system it still wants to install/upgrade the 0.21
> 'libmyth' packages. Any one have any ideas what's going on here?
>
> 3) Latest NVidia Packages - Not specifically a MythTV 0.22 question,
> but somewhat related, especially with regards to VDPAU. I'm having
> problems figuring out what the latest NVidia packages are currently
> available through ATrpms. I see some 190.36 packages in the stable
> repo, but I also see some 190.36 packages available in the bleeding
> repo. There was also a thread on this list a couple of days ago that
> seemed to indicate the 190.40 (the official RC from NVidia) driver
> would soon be available, but it hasn't shown up yet, at least not from
> what I can tell. So, if I want the "latest and greatest" packages
> which ones should I be using? Am I just being too impatient on the
> 190.40 packages?
>
> Any help would be appreciated.
>
> John
>
> _______________________________________________
> atrpms-users mailing list
> atrpms-users [at] atrpms
> http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users

_______________________________________________
atrpms-users mailing list
atrpms-users [at] atrpms
http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users

jrw3319 at gmail

Oct 20, 2009, 2:52 PM

Post #3 of 9 (1192 views)
Permalink

Re: Questions about MythTV 0.22 Packages [In reply to]

On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Collier Family <judithc [at] bigpond> wrote:
> John,
>
> From what I can see 0.22-fixes branch of mythtv is improving very rapidly
> with fixes every few hours.
>
> revision �22547 is this mornings fixes
>
> RC1 eas released at revision 22453
>
> atrpms bleeding was from before that at revision 22186
>
> As you can see bleeding is a fair way behind and probably has many issues
> already fixed.
>
> I am creating rpms for my own systems from svn nightly and installing them
> on my RHEL5.3 x86_64 and i386 as they seem to be better each day.
>
> I'm finding 0.22 is �a great step forward and the menus are noticibly
> faster.
>
> regards
> Stephen Collier
>
>

Thanks for the response Stephen. I assume you are basing the 22186
version on the info here:
http://atrpms.net/dist/f11/mythtv-0.22/

However, if you actually browse the repo at http://dl.atrpms.net you
will see that the 0.22 packages are now in testing, and the latest
available packages look like revision 22514. So, I guess I am running
at RC1 level (or later). Based on the daily, or even hourly, fixes
that you say are occurring maybe I just need to wait a bit longer for
things to stabilize.

Thanks again,
John

_______________________________________________
atrpms-users mailing list
atrpms-users [at] atrpms
http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users

ylee at pobox

Oct 21, 2009, 3:37 AM

Post #4 of 9 (1203 views)
Permalink

Re: Questions about MythTV 0.22 Packages [In reply to]

John Welch <jrw3319 [at] gmail> says:
> I had hoped that with VDPAU entering the mainstream with 0.22 that
> when I upgraded I would see at least as good, if not better, playback
> / performance, but unfortunately that's not the case for me. Playback
> with VDPAU enabled now seems "fuzzy" and sometimes looks almost like
> it is slightly in slow-motion.

I have not noticed any difference in VDPAU performance or behavior
with ATrpms' r22514 versus the Avenard-backported VDPAU code I
released as part of bijou.

That said, despite being (or perhaps because it is) a later revision
than the one released as 0.22RC1, r22514 is still noticeably buggier
than 0.21-fixes[1] and I recommend that those who are concerned about
stability and a bug-free setup stay with 0.21-fixes, whether the bijou
version or not, for now. Hopefully this will change soon.

[1] One showstopper, caused by a window-focus issue with Qt widgets,
results in mythfrontend becoming unresponsive to keyboard commands
once it's used to play a video with a bookmark. There are certain
workaround/solutions but it is unquestionably a serious issue for
anyone using MythVideo.

--
Yeechang Lee <ylee [at] pobox> | San Francisco CA US

_______________________________________________
atrpms-users mailing list
atrpms-users [at] atrpms
http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users

jrw3319 at gmail

Oct 21, 2009, 6:00 AM

Post #5 of 9 (1199 views)
Permalink

Re: Questions about MythTV 0.22 Packages [In reply to]

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 6:37 AM, Yeechang Lee <ylee [at] pobox> wrote:
> John Welch <jrw3319 [at] gmail> says:
>> I had hoped that with VDPAU entering the mainstream with 0.22 that
>> when I upgraded I would see at least as good, if not better, playback
>> / performance, but unfortunately that's not the case for me. �Playback
>> with VDPAU enabled now seems "fuzzy" and sometimes looks almost like
>> it is slightly in slow-motion.
>
> I have not noticed any difference in VDPAU performance or behavior
> with ATrpms' r22514 versus the Avenard-backported VDPAU code I
> released as part of bijou.
>
> That said, despite being (or perhaps because it is) a later revision
> than the one released as 0.22RC1, r22514 is still noticeably buggier
> than 0.21-fixes[1] and I recommend that those who are concerned about
> stability and a bug-free setup stay with 0.21-fixes, whether the bijou
> version or not, for now. Hopefully this will change soon.
>
> [1] One showstopper, caused by a window-focus issue with Qt widgets,
> results in mythfrontend becoming unresponsive to keyboard commands
> once it's used to play a video with a bookmark. There are certain
> workaround/solutions but it is unquestionably a serious issue for
> anyone using MythVideo.
>
> --
> Yeechang Lee <ylee [at] pobox> | San Francisco CA US
>
> _______________________________________________

Thanks Yeechang. Generally I have found the 0.22 packages from
'atrpms-testing' to be working pretty well, other than the VDPAU
stuff. A couple of hiccups here and there but nothing major. Maybe I
just haven't stumbled upon the more serious issues. As far as VDPAU,
maybe I just need to play around with some settings. I found that the
upgrade to 0.22 automatically changed my audio settings, so maybe
there is a video / playback setting that I need to adjust as well.
Also, when using the 'bijou' packages I had created my own playback
profile for VDPAU, but was looking to use one of the built-in VDPAU
profiles with 0.22 because honestly I had no idea what I was doing
when I setup my own. Maybe I just have to find the right profile.

I'm also finding out that what the MythTV developers consider a
Release Candidate is a lot different than what I'm used to seeing with
other software packages / projects. This isn't a complaint or
anything; just an observation.

John

_______________________________________________
atrpms-users mailing list
atrpms-users [at] atrpms
http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users

jyavenard at gmail

Oct 21, 2009, 6:12 AM

Post #6 of 9 (1197 views)
Permalink

Re: Questions about MythTV 0.22 Packages [In reply to]

Hi

2009/10/22 John Welch <jrw3319 [at] gmail>:

> maybe I just need to play around with some settings. �I found that the
> upgrade to 0.22 automatically changed my audio settings, so maybe
> there is a video / playback setting that I need to adjust as well.

0.21-bijou had new audio upmixer code, it behaves very differently to
what's in 0.22 and need a different audio configuration for digital
output

Those changes are in trunk, but not 0.22-fixes

> Also, when using the 'bijou' packages I had created my own playback
> profile for VDPAU, but was looking to use one of the built-in VDPAU
> profiles with 0.22 because honestly I had no idea what I was doing
> when I setup my own. �Maybe I just have to find the right profile.

Wait right after 0.22 comes out, I will be comitting changes creating
default vdpau profiles..

_______________________________________________
atrpms-users mailing list
atrpms-users [at] atrpms
http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users

Axel.Thimm at ATrpms

Oct 22, 2009, 7:51 PM

Post #7 of 9 (1175 views)
Permalink

Re: Questions about MythTV 0.22 Packages [In reply to]

Hi,

On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 03:00:49PM -0400, John Welch wrote:
> 2) libmyth Packages - On my MythTV back-end system I had installed the
> 'bijou' packages for the HDHR multi-rec capabilities. Because the
> 'regular' 0.21 packages in the stable repo eventually superseded the
> 'bijou' packages I had been blocking 'yum' from upgraded the MythTV
> packages on this system. I thought this would be taken care of when I
> upgraded to 0.22, but when I went to install the 0.22 packages yum
> still wanted to install the latest 0.21 'libmyth' packages. I blocked
> these packages and upgraded to 0.22 without any issues (at least none
> that I am aware of yet), however now even when I run a regular 'yum
> update' on this system it still wants to install/upgrade the 0.21
> 'libmyth' packages. Any one have any ideas what's going on here?

This sounds like what you asked yum to do: You locked the version of
some packages to a specfic one and yum tries to fulfill your wish :)

Just remove any locking/filtering etc. and yum will behave normaly again.

> 3) Latest NVidia Packages - Not specifically a MythTV 0.22 question,
> but somewhat related, especially with regards to VDPAU. I'm having
> problems figuring out what the latest NVidia packages are currently
> available through ATrpms.

Just install nvidia-graphics.

Other than that all nvidia packages that build are there.

> So, if I want the "latest and greatest" packages
> which ones should I be using?

"Latest & greatest" and stable: Use nvidia-graphics.

"Latest & greatest" and beta: Use nvidia-graphics with
testing/bleeding turned on.

> Am I just being too impatient on the 190.40 packages?

It depends - if this is a production system, then don't use beta
drivers. Otherwise if this is for experimenting with 0.22 as a tech
preview on one of your systems you can keep testing/bleeding enables
24/7 - and while on the experimental side, you could even go F12 -
there are packages for F12 at ATrpms now as well, including beta 0.22
and beta nvidia drivers to maximize the betas in the equations. :)

(Actually I'd love if there were people willing to test all the betas
and would find out that most of it is already working).
--
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net

J.Pilk at tesco

Oct 23, 2009, 12:11 AM

Post #8 of 9 (1172 views)
Permalink

Re: Questions about MythTV 0.22 Packages [In reply to]

Axel Thimm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 03:00:49PM -0400, John Welch wrote:
>> 2) libmyth Packages - On my MythTV back-end system I had installed the
>> 'bijou' packages for the HDHR multi-rec capabilities. Because the
>> 'regular' 0.21 packages in the stable repo eventually superseded the
>> 'bijou' packages I had been blocking 'yum' from upgraded the MythTV
>> packages on this system. I thought this would be taken care of when I
>> upgraded to 0.22, but when I went to install the 0.22 packages yum
>> still wanted to install the latest 0.21 'libmyth' packages. I blocked
>> these packages and upgraded to 0.22 without any issues (at least none
>> that I am aware of yet), however now even when I run a regular 'yum
>> update' on this system it still wants to install/upgrade the 0.21
>> 'libmyth' packages. Any one have any ideas what's going on here?
>
> This sounds like what you asked yum to do: You locked the version of
> some packages to a specfic one and yum tries to fulfill your wish :)

I'm seeing the same with Smart: I have the 0.22-216 build installed on
fc10, but with 'stable' and 'testing' both enabled the libmyth* 212 and
213 spins are shown as upgrades.

The 'upgrade' from bijou was very smooth (on both CentOS and fc10) and
everything I have tried works. At first I lost sound in DVD replay - I
use mp2 sound - but that problem goes away if I let the menu run for a
few seconds.

>
> Just remove any locking/filtering etc. and yum will behave normaly again.
>
>> 3) Latest NVidia Packages - Not specifically a MythTV 0.22 question,
>> but somewhat related, especially with regards to VDPAU. I'm having
>> problems figuring out what the latest NVidia packages are currently
>> available through ATrpms.
>
> Just install nvidia-graphics.
>
> Other than that all nvidia packages that build are there.
>
>> So, if I want the "latest and greatest" packages
>> which ones should I be using?
>
> "Latest & greatest" and stable: Use nvidia-graphics.
>
> "Latest & greatest" and beta: Use nvidia-graphics with
> testing/bleeding turned on.
>
>> Am I just being too impatient on the 190.40 packages?
>
> It depends - if this is a production system, then don't use beta
> drivers. Otherwise if this is for experimenting with 0.22 as a tech
> preview on one of your systems you can keep testing/bleeding enables
> 24/7 - and while on the experimental side, you could even go F12 -
> there are packages for F12 at ATrpms now as well, including beta 0.22
> and beta nvidia drivers to maximize the betas in the equations. :)
>
> (Actually I'd love if there were people willing to test all the betas
> and would find out that most of it is already working).
>
>

_______________________________________________
atrpms-users mailing list
atrpms-users [at] atrpms
http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users

jrw3319 at gmail

Oct 23, 2009, 5:48 AM

Post #9 of 9 (1150 views)
Permalink

Re: Questions about MythTV 0.22 Packages [In reply to]

First, thanks to everyone who responded. All the answers were helpful.

On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:51 PM, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm [at] atrpms> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 03:00:49PM -0400, John Welch wrote:
>> 2) libmyth Packages - On my MythTV back-end system I had installed the
>> 'bijou' packages for the HDHR multi-rec capabilities. �Because the
>> 'regular' 0.21 packages in the stable repo eventually superseded the
>> 'bijou' packages I had been blocking 'yum' from upgraded the MythTV
>> packages on this system. �I thought this would be taken care of when I
>> upgraded to 0.22, but when I went to install the 0.22 packages yum
>> still wanted to install the latest 0.21 'libmyth' packages. �I blocked
>> these packages and upgraded to 0.22 without any issues (at least none
>> that I am aware of yet), however now even when I run a regular 'yum
>> update' on this system it still wants to install/upgrade the 0.21
>> 'libmyth' packages. �Any one have any ideas what's going on here?
>
> This sounds like what you asked yum to do: You locked the version of
> some packages to a specfic one and yum tries to fulfill your wish :)
>
> Just remove any locking/filtering etc. and yum will behave normaly again.
I never specifically "locked" the MythTV packages using yum
configuration. After the 'bijou' updates stopped being in sync with
the stable MythTV packages I just ran yum using the
"--exclude=\*myth\*" option. I guess I was surprised to see that even
after I updated to the 0.22 packages and stopped using any exclude
options yum still wanted to "upgrade" libmyth packages from the 0.21
series. Additionally, on another system where I never had the 'bijou'
packages installed and never did any command line excludes the 0.21
libmyth packages showed up as upgrades when I enabled the 'testing'
repo in order to upgrade to 0.22. On both systems I decided to just
let yum do it's thing. The 0.21 packages were installed and I haven't
noticed any issues so far.

>
>> 3) Latest NVidia Packages - Not specifically a MythTV 0.22 question,
>> but somewhat related, especially with regards to VDPAU. �I'm having
>> problems figuring out what the latest NVidia packages are currently
>> available through ATrpms.
>
> Just install nvidia-graphics.
>
> Other than that all nvidia packages that build are there.
>
>> So, if I want the "latest and greatest" packages
>> which ones should I be using?
>
> "Latest & greatest" and stable: Use nvidia-graphics.
>
> "Latest & greatest" and beta: Use nvidia-graphics with
> testing/bleeding turned on.
>
Simply running 'yum install nvidia-graphics' doesn't seem to work for
me anymore. I'm sure it is something I've messed up because I
switched back and forth between using the official NVidia installer
and the ATrpms packages. I have also manually installed some of your
packages by downloading them and using rpm to install.

>> Am I just being too impatient on the 190.40 packages?

Actually, I guess I was just impatient because I now see that the
190.40 packages are in the repo. Of course now 190.42 is the latest
RC from NVidia :)
>
> It depends - if this is a production system, then don't use beta
> drivers. Otherwise if this is for experimenting with 0.22 as a tech
> preview on one of your systems you can keep testing/bleeding enables
> 24/7 - and while on the experimental side, you could even go F12 -
> there are packages for F12 at ATrpms now as well, including beta 0.22
> and beta nvidia drivers to maximize the betas in the equations. :)
>
> (Actually I'd love if there were people willing to test all the betas
> and would find out that most of it is already working).
I don't really consider any of my home systems to be "production"
systems. I wouldn't be too happy if I was without the use of MythTV
for too long, but my thinking is if I do the proper planning and take
the necessary precautions (backups, etc.) there isn't any reason I
shouldn't be able to go backwards if an upgrade goes wrong. That
said, I wouldn't want to run any software where serious issues and
bugs are known to exist (not just with ATrpms packages, but in
general).

> --
> Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
>

Thanks again,
John

_______________________________________________
atrpms-users mailing list
atrpms-users [at] atrpms
http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads