Author Topic: HDHomeRun IR receiver  (Read 606 times)

merkur2k

  • Addicted
  • *
  • Posts: 513
    • View Profile
HDHomeRun IR receiver
« on: April 14, 2009, 12:13:24 am »
I am replacing my PVR350 tuner with a HDHomeRun and as such would like to switch from using the PVR350 IR receiver to using the same remote with the HDHomeRun IR receiver (at least until the gyration stuff is mature). I followed the directions here http://forum.linuxmce.org/index.php?topic=3233.0 but still no go. the "udp" device fails to start during a router reload. I had seen a message in the log for the udp device early on that seemed to indicate it didnt have any remotes configured, whatever that means, but now it is not writing a logfile at all. I intend to continue using the "lircd.conf.hauppauge" (template 360) as that matches my remote and worked fine previously. I can run lircd manually and use irw to view the remote commands, but lmce does not respond to them.
I am wondering if i am doing this step correctly: "From here just add your remote config file with proper linuxmce mappings and you should be all set." as I am not sure what to do. I have clicked the "add remote" button for the MD and chosen the lircd.conf.hauppauge device.
I have looked over the wiki but have only found advanced info on creating new devices, not the proper use of existing ones, but perhaps i missed something. Any pointers?

merkur2k

  • Addicted
  • *
  • Posts: 513
    • View Profile
Re: HDHomeRun IR receiver
« Reply #1 on: April 14, 2009, 07:02:55 pm »
As a followup, I have resolved this problem.
It turns out changes werent being saved to the device template so an invalid lirc command line was being generated.
The error message given in the web interface when saving changes was very misleading too, and should be considered a bug. The error message "Please enter a description!" was being given for an empty device data comment field. I feel this is a bug since:
1) The error message did not accurately describe the field with the problem.
2) The comment field should not be required in the first place.
Should I file this as a bug report somewhere?