reprogram the EPG

pharmswo

New Member
Hi,

I would like to rewrite the executable that is run when the "epg" button is pressed. At the moment I'm guessing that I could probably hack around some kind oi Dreambox epg and get it working on the Humax.

Is it possible to replace just one executable or is it a monolithic program with one executable for the entire remote control?

Before anyone wonders why I want to undertake this insanity I will explain.....
My Humax-hdr lives at a holiday home in Germany and the satellite points at astra 28 & 19.
So I want an epg that covers these two satellites for up to 7 days and that correctly handles the time zone differeces as well...

Regards

Paul
 

raydon

Well-Known Member
I am assuming it is the "Guide"button you are referring to when you say "epg" button. It is indeed one monolithic program (settop) that is not only responsible for the remote control, but all functionality of the Foxsat HDR. It is not possible for the Foxsat HDR to display anything other than the Freesat EPG from within its own Graphical User Interface. I suppose that with the custom firmware installed it may be possible to create a custom EPG covering two satellites that would display only in the web interface, but you would not be able to set reservations from there.
 
OP
P

pharmswo

New Member
I am assuming it is the "Guide"button you are referring to when you say "epg" button. It is indeed one monolithic program (settop) that is not only responsible for the remote control, but all functionality of the Foxsat HDR. It is not possible for the Foxsat HDR to display anything other than the Freesat EPG from within its own Graphical User Interface.
Hi Raydon,

Many thanks for the firmware and for the fast reply.

Is it possible to completely retask theHDR with debian/ubuntu and then use myth tv?

Regards

Paul
 

Black Hole

May contain traces of nut
I think you misunderstand. The Humax code interfaces with the hardware directly, not through standard system drivers, so to create something of the nature you appear to mean first you would have to work out how to interface your code with the hardware that provides the TV tuner, audio/video interfaces, remote control input, etc etc - and most of that is handled as a system-on-a-chip.
 

raydon

Well-Known Member
Is it possible to completely retask theHDR with debian/ubuntu and then use myth tv?
Sorry, no. You would be better off using a dedicated Media PC with a linux distro. and a sat tuner card fitted. The possibilites are then much more flexible.
 
OP
P

pharmswo

New Member
I think you misunderstand. The Humax code interfaces with the hardware directly, not through standard system drivers, so to create something of the nature you appear to mean first you would have to work out how to interface your code with the hardware that provides the TV tuner, audio/video interfaces, remote control input, etc etc - and most of that is handled as a system-on-a-chip.
Hi,

I understand what you are saying and that I will not be able to get what I want by a rewrite of the EPG.

But what I am now wondering is whether it is possible to completely bypass/remove all the Humay code and then use debian/ubuntu with myth TV.

Or since the Humax box stores the freesat epg in files (I think), and with the firmware we can include Astra 19 channels in the freesat mode, perhaps it is possible to add epg info into the existing files.

Regards

Paul
 

raydon

Well-Known Member
No, because you have no means of interfacing with the dedicated hardware on the HDR. Humax are not about to release an API (application programming interface) anytime soon, nor ever likely to.
 

MartinLiddle

Super Moderator
Staff member
But what I am now wondering is whether it is possible to completely bypass/remove all the Humay code and then use debian/ubuntu with myth TV.
This is software so with enough determination and technical expertise anything is possible. First though you have to produce device drivers for all the (largely) undocumented components of the FOXSAT. My question is why would anyone put in the vast amount of effort to do that on a box that has been out of production for several years?
 
OP
P

pharmswo

New Member
This is software so with enough determination and technical expertise anything is possible. First though you have to produce device drivers for all the (largely) undocumented components of the FOXSAT. My question is why would anyone put in the vast amount of effort to do that on a box that has been out of production for several years?
Hi,

Many thanks to all who have posted replies.

I wondererd what was reasonably possible. And now I know.

Regards

Paul
 

Black Hole

May contain traces of nut
I understand what you are saying
No, I think you only half understood what I was saying (if that).

Yes, the Foxsat uses a Linux kernel for multitasking and file system management (etc), and the open-source elements are documented (as per the licensing requirements). However, all the important stuff (tuner control, video output, HDMI handshaking, sound...) is not in the public domain and is operated by a single executable that is launched by the OS. Replacing the Humax proprietary (undocumented) code means reverse-engineering the compiled code to find out how (for example) the system-on-a-chip (specifically targeted for this kind of application) is commanded to take the incoming data stream from the tuner, pass it through the decompression hardware, and write it to the video buffer - and many other functions besides.

There will be no off-the-shelf solution for this, MythTV (for example) expects to be presented with standard hardware drivers to access tuner and video hardware - almost certainly on an x86 computer. You would have to recompile MythTV for MIPS architecture, and provide your own drivers so that it could access the peripherals - and even then (because of the custom nature of the Foxsat hardware) MythTV itself might need to be rewritten in parts because the data routing built into the hardware may not support the access modes that MythTV expects. Having done all that, most likely you would find the hardware is not powerful enough or has enough memory to run it.

Now do you have any understanding of the scale of the task?
 

raydon

Well-Known Member
Helpful as ever I see BH. You may as well have called the OP stupid. Your last post was completely unnecessary as the subject had already been completely covered to his satisfaction by my earlier responses. You're reply was totally disproportionate. You didn't have to beat him over the head to make your point.
 
OP
P

pharmswo

New Member
No, I think you only half understood what I was saying (if that).

Yes, the Foxsat uses a Linux kernel for multitasking and file system management (etc), and the open-source elements are documented (as per the licensing requirements). However, all the important stuff (tuner control, video output, HDMI handshaking, sound...) is not in the public domain and is operated by a single executable that is launched by the OS. Replacing the Humax proprietary (undocumented) code means reverse-engineering the compiled code to find out how (for example) the system-on-a-chip (specifically targeted for this kind of application) is commanded to take the incoming data stream from the tuner, pass it through the decompression hardware, and write it to the video buffer - and many other functions besides.

There will be no off-the-shelf solution for this, MythTV (for example) expects to be presented with standard hardware drivers to access tuner and video hardware - almost certainly on an x86 computer. You would have to recompile MythTV for MIPS architecture, and provide your own drivers so that it could access the peripherals - and even then (because of the custom nature of the Foxsat hardware) MythTV itself might need to be rewritten in parts because the data routing built into the hardware may not support the access modes that MythTV expects. Having done all that, most likely you would find the hardware is not powerful enough or has enough memory to run it.

Now do you have any understanding of the scale of the task?
Hi,

Many thanks for the clear explanations and level of detail. This pretty much fits in with what I understood and is why I won't make any effort on this.

Regards

Paul
 

Black Hole

May contain traces of nut
Helpful as ever I see BH. You may as well have called the OP stupid. Your last post was completely unnecessary as the subject had already been completely covered to his satisfaction by my earlier responses. You're reply was totally disproportianate. You didn't have to beat him over the head to make your point.
Well - either post 4 wasn't sufficient or the OP ignored it, and if there is any irrelevant post in this topic... Let's not forget how late you were to this particular party!

(and I was posting before post 9)
 
Top