Recording directly into a subdirectory or NAS/USB drive

[Code is a Hole]

Thank you MymsMan, please understand, this is like wing walking without a harness, without a parachute, whilst flying upside down

Though I have good news, I replaced four recordings out of their series link folder and placed them back to the root level, they have now been processed and have returned to the series link folder

Just checked the other two rules, each in their own folder, they have also been processed

So it seems 'sweeper' will not process rules if there is no 'sweeper.config' file

 

[Black Hole]

So it seems 'sweeper' will not process rules if there is no 'sweeper.config' file

Er... of course not. Have you actually saved to commit the file (save button becomes active when there are changes to save)?:



Once saved, you can view and edit the sweeper.conf file directly... either via the "text editor" button (see above) or via WebIF >> Diagnostics >> File Editor:



Scan runs every minute, and Scan reads the auto-processing settings to see how often to actually run:





Then, with log level set to "debugging information" (see above), the sweeper run shows up in auto.log like this:

So it seems 'sweeper' will not process rules if there is no 'sweeper.config' file

Yet again, this demonstrates your lack of attention for detail, which is an absolute requirement when coding. One silly slip and it won't work.

I've wasted three days on this

You mean you've wasted our three days listening to you on this. Sweeper works, and if it's not working it's (most likely) something you are not doing right... but if you won't show us what you are doing there's no point whining about it.

 

[Code is a Hole]

which is an absolute requirement when coding

I don't code, I tinker, I dabble, I like watching recordings on the telly, but I've now reached a point when I'd like to stop manually moving recordings and filing them in to sub-directories, it appears 'sweeper' is now working

Yes I did press 'save' the issue seems to have solved itself by having a small meaningless rule set at the root level so it gets saved as 'sweeper.conf', I report back tomorrow when new recordings have been made

Also please keep in mind, my concentration level is terrible

Thank you again, now 'sweeper' works, I may try to have my recordings saved to my Buffalo TS NAS

 

[MymsMan]

Er... of course not. Have you actually saved to commit the file (save button becomes active when there are changes to save)?:

Andrea has no rules to save in the auto.config file because she has defined all her rules at the folder level.
This is a perfectly valid usage scenario but obviously something that @af123 never considered and no one else has encountered.

I am just glad we have finally cracked the mystery

 

[Code is a Hole]

Thank you again for your support MymsMan

Seems I not the only one who lack attention to detail, remember the instance of not being able to save just one scheduled recording, and my scenario not being believed, oh how the mighty have further to fall

I am just glad we have finally cracked the mystery

I have my other Humax Fox set up with 'sweeper', I'll check it tomorrow, make the minor edit (and SAVE it) and report back

 

[Black Hole]

Andrea has no rules to save in the auto.config file because she has defined all her rules at the folder level.

Where did she say that? If the OP had posted at least a screen-shot of her rules we would have seen that immediately.

Sweeper rules for an individual folder are stored in a file ".sweeper" in that folder, but would be difficult for the inexperienced to find because of the leading "." (the listing is suppressed in a normal "ls" command).

Has af123 really cocked up scanning for sweeper rules on individual folder? Seems unlikely, but I'll check. In any case, clicking the text editor button on the GUI editor gets you this (random rules, just for test):



...which clearly shows where the configuration file is stored and what it's called.

However, all that said, I think sweeper rules for individual folders is the wrong way to go to achieve what the OP wants. A rule for that folder only applies to that folder, and a new series folder created as a result of setting a new series recording will not have a sweeper rule to dictate what happens to it. Global sweeper rules applied to My Video (/mod/etc/sweeper.conf) can be written to accommodate series recordings created in the future (set and forget). Frankly, I can't see any significant purpose for sweeper rules on individual folders. Series folders come and go, My Video is forever.

I don't code, I tinker, I dabble

This is coding. It requires attention to detail, like it or not. IIRC your initial posts on this forum were very gung-ho as if you knew something about it.

my scenario not being believed

It's not a question of belief, it's a question of showing us what you are doing - which you seem very reluctant to do

If you posted your rules and output as requested we might be able to spot what it is going a lot quicker

...and, so far as I can see, you still haven't.

 

[Black Hole]

Has af123 really cocked up scanning for sweeper rules on individual folder? Seems unlikely, but I'll check.

@af123: Confirmed. It appears sweeper rules defined for individual folders do not run except by clicking the test button (or possibly only run if there is also a sweeper rule set for My Video). Very frustrating. Is that intentional?

I have thought of a use-case: if the user wants to sub-file recordings from a catch-all folder (global rules having deposited recordings into the catch-all folder in the first place).

Mods: I think this thread should be split, as it strays significantly away from its original purpose.

 

[Code is a Hole]

However, all that said, I think sweeper rules for individual folders is the wrong way to go to achieve what the OP wants.

That's why I prefer to do on a 'folder by folder' basis, basically there is no call for having every series link folder process in this fashion

Oh, if anyone is interested, I have sourced a supply of single use dummies, ideal for throwing on to the floor or chucking out of a window, in addition, a supply of ear plugs, for those in close vicinity to someone having the screaming hab-dabs

Back to, erm where was I, oh yes, I created a rule in the root folder and them used the disable option, so effectively there are no actions to perform, guess what, all rules in the series linked folders were processed as expected

So, to the second Humax Fox, I used Solar-PuTTY to 'touch .sweeper.conf' in the '/mod/etc/' directory, went to the 'Text Editor' in 'Diag' and clicked on '/mod/etc/sweeper.conf' in the list at the bottom of the screen, when open, complained about not being a text file, but octo stream or something, so deleted it, sorry removed it

Again created another rule at the root directory, then disabled it and restarted, oh I changed the settings for auto processing to show scan information, when I check, some series linked folder were being processed

I then copied pasted my rule list from a different rule and made the necessary changes for search criteria and folder location

Did a restart and within a short time, all my chosen (notice the use of chosen (my choice) of series linked folders, not global) series linked folder were nicely sorted

Seems I fell upon this as a short-sighted overlooked feature, there has to be a '.sweeper.conf' file present at the root level, even if only selected series linked folders need to be processed, in which case, each folder has its own '.sweeper' file

Jelly baby anyone

It's only TELLY

 

[af123]

@af123: Confirmed. It appears sweeper rules defined for individual folders do not run except by clicking the test button (or possibly only run if there is also a sweeper rule set for My Video). Very frustrating. Is that intentional?

See

sweeper/auto.hook at master

sweeper

git.hpkg.tv

Sweeper does not even register itself with the automatic processing system unless /mod/etc/sweeper.conf exists. That's almost certainly because the original implementation only had that one file, there were no per-folder rules.
It wouldn't be too hard to adjust.

 

[Code is a Hole]

Sweeper does not even register itself with the automatic processing system unless /mod/etc/sweeper.conf

Thank you af123 for confirming my findings, as my work-around solution seems to remedy the situation, there is a little less urgency to write the update in to the software

I have had to add a rule at the root level after all, one remote scheduling event seems to have picked up my searched for programme as a single event rather than a series linked event, so is placing recordings at the root level and are now being swept away to the correct folder

 

[Trev]

[rant]

Oh, if anyone is interested, I have sourced a supply of single use dummies, ideal for throwing on to the floor or chucking out of a window, in addition, a supply of ear plugs, for those in close vicinity to someone having the screaming hab-dabs

No one is interested and for goodness sake stop being so bloody childish. You may not actually believe this, but people here are trying to help you, but you seem unable to help them help you. Such as repeated refusal to post your rules for them to see, sloppy nomenclature leading to confusion over exactly about what you are talking etc.
If you want help then bloody well answer the questions asked instead of wandering off into the bondu along irrelevant tracks.
I would suggest 'shape up' and try to 'fit in' or go elsewhere (polite version) for assistance but I suspect that you will struggle to find anywhere unless the members there are the same as those here.
THE EXPERTS ARE HERE. So it would be good if you treated them as such, showed due deference and answered their questions[/rant]

 

[Code is a Hole]

THE EXPERTS ARE HERE. So it would be good if you treated them as such

Hello Trev (The Dumb One, (here here))

Yes, the 'Experts' are there, but I managed to identify a problem that had never been thought of and reported back the solution

[ Expert ], a person who is very knowledgeable about or skilful in a particular area, (not then there is no sweeper.conf file)

As I said previously, I tinker, I dabble, if I choose not to respond by giving you what you ask for, then don't shout or otherwise verbally abuse members, you may scare off readers who have not yet asked a question, you don't know the personal reason of who you are verbally abusing

Don't forget, I posted my findings for the benefit of others, how we got there is otherwise irrelevant

If you want help then bloody well answer the questions asked instead of wandering off into the bondu along irrelevant tracks.

Stop swearing and chill

I would suggest 'shape up' and try to 'fit in' or go elsewhere

School yard bully (this is my ball and you're not playing)

Obviously, diversity and inclusion not welcome here

 

[Trev]

Of course it is, but snowflakes are frowned upon. by some.

 

[Black Hole]

Sweeper does not even register itself with the automatic processing system unless /mod/etc/sweeper.conf exists. That's almost certainly because the original implementation only had that one file, there were no per-folder rules.
It wouldn't be too hard to adjust.

Yes, but that information does not appear to be anywhere that is accessible to users, and the user interface allows for sweeper rules to be set up on individual folders without there being a /mod/etc/sweeper.conf. This creates an unnecessary trip-wire (and the OP fell over it).

Possible solutions:

1. Add it to the documentation that global rules are necessary for local rules to have effect;
2. As above, plus add a warning in the GUI editor for local rules;
3. As 1, plus have the GUI editor for local rules create a no-op sweeper.conf on save (if no sweeper.conf exists);
4. Scan the whole tree for sweeper rules files;

There is a problem with 1 & 2 in that there is no such thing as an empty sweeper.conf file - the GUI editor simply deletes it if the editor fields are empty (fair enough). We need an explicit "no-op" code to put in one.

1 needs to be implemented unless 4 is implemented, but actually I prefer option 3: it seems to me the most likely reason to have local sweeper rules is if they are in a [ folder set up specifically to receive files from a global sweeper rule.

 

[MymsMan]

If sweeper were to be reimplemented today I am sure there would be no sweeper.conf file - there would just be an, optional, .sweeper folder in the My Video directory just like any other folder avoiding all the need for special case code but no-one could foresee how it would develop all those years ago.

Option 1 is the lazy way out, documenting away problems doesn't really solve anything since very few fully RTFM.
Option 4 is not complicated to implement and probably less work than 2 or 3, An alternative to 3 would be for Sweeper package installation to Touch sweeper.conf to ensure it always exists

 

[Black Hole]

there would just be an, optional, .sweeper folder in the My Video directory

I think you mean .sweeper file rather than folder. Indeed, it's all become a bit messy and could stand some tidying up.

An alternative to 3 would be for Sweeper package installation to Touch sweeper.conf to ensure it always exists

A problem I foresee with that is the conflict with the existing GUI wanting to delete an empty file (so that if there are no rules to process, sweeper isn't hooked into the auto-scan). A no-op place-holder would avoid that.

Alternative idea: why have local sweeper rules at all? Everything could be in the global My Video rule set.

However, disregarding tidiness, I agree AF's proposal (my option 4) patches it up with least knock-on effect.

 

[Code is a Hole]

A problem I foresee with that is the conflict with the existing GUI wanting to delete an empty file (so that if there are no rules to process, sweeper isn't hooked into the auto-scan). A no-op place-holder would avoid that.

As .sweeper is hidden, would an auto delete empty folders plugin see a hidden file which has no content

Alternative idea: why have local sweeper rules at all? Everything could be in the global My Video rule set.

A local file acting on one folder requires less debugging for the novice, my own needs are to move some programmes, which are shrunk and watched, others are moved when they are just shrunk, some are moved to just a series folder, while others are moved in to a series/episode folder

Trying to work out the logic would be a steep mountain to clime for the beginner

As my rules are in the series folder, there is no need to concern one's self about variations on how series linked folders are named, meaning rules can easily be moved from folder to folder as needed, needing only a minor tweek if needed, a change in folder name in the destination folder path would be needed if absolute path relative to the root is used, rather than using a relative path to the current folder where the rule is located

again much simpler for a novice (myself included) to get their heads around

When doing things that look complicated, I have always heard the mantra [ K.I.S.S ]

1. Add it to the documentation that global rules are necessary for local rules to have effect;

I found that just having the start of a rule [ eg click new rule, then edit the rule], then add a # or ## to comment out the rule worked for me ( your system may be set up differently )