[ATrpms-users] Mythtv upgrade to 0.21 question

[Axel Thimm]

On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 04:13:40PM -0400, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky wrote:
> Brian Long wrote at about 12:20:34 -0400 on Thursday, April 3, 2008:
>  > On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 10:19 AM, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky <atrpms at kosowsky.org>
>  > wrote:
>  > 
>  > > I have held off upgrading to 0.21 until now because it seemed like
>  > > people were experiencing some early issues and I did not have the time
>  > > to deal with them then.
>  > >
>  > > So, I'm wondering whether they have been resolve or whether there are
>  > > any persistent issues or gotchas with the upgrade?
>  > >
>  > > Also, my hardware is relatively old making video playback of hdtv
>  > > marginal so I want to make sure that there are no significant
>  > > performance hits with the new version that will bite me.
>  > 
>  > 
>  > If you look at 0.21 threads on mythtv-users, you'll see folks who had
>  > marginal playback on 0.20 have horrible playback on 0.21.  They had to make
>  > significant changes to the new playback profiles to get things back to
>  > normal.  I believe there is a default profile "Slim" which approximates what
>  > other folks were using in 0.21 (XvMC, etc).
>  > 
>  > /Brian/
> 
> Yes. That is exactly my concern. My current mythtv setup works fine
> and since I use it as a real working PVR app, part of me thinks that
> if "it ain't broke don't fix it" and is hesitant to upgrade.

The 0.20.x packages are still offered at ATrpms, so you can indeed
back up your db (once you repair it) and upgrade - see whether 0.21
works fine for you w/o or w/o tuning - and decide on whether to stay
with 0.21 or downgrade back to the previous packages (and restoring
the database).

If you do find issues that you can't fix with 0.21 you should please
report them upstream so they can be fixed. Of course this sometimes
means that upstream may ask you to perform some tests, so if you won't
be able to test 0.21 anymore due to downgrading then write so in the
bug report.
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.atrpms.net/pipermail/atrpms-users/attachments/20080404/22753558/attachment-0001.bin