Alternate PIDs in RM

Nils_Ekberg · Post by **Nils_Ekberg** » Mon Jun 07, 2004 7:33 am

mr_d_p_gumby wrote:1) You need to add the 00CD:sony variant to RS70RS70 (RS 15-1995 7 in 1 wTime & Extender Support).rdf.

Typo on my part I had it on the 00C5 instead of 00CD.

mr_d_p_gumby wrote:2) You've got two sets of Millennium 4 RDFs, with spelling as 'Millenium' and 'Millennium'..

I will fix that. Awhile back the spelling was corrected but I didn't delete the ones that were wrong.

mr_d_p_gumby wrote:3) A while ago, Rob posted his replacements for the Replay remotes. There still seems to be a lot of Replay RDFs, so maybe Rob can take a look & comment as to the validity of them..

I will wait to hear from Rob on which ones are obsolete.

mr_d_p_gumby wrote:4) The WAVUpgrade=Yes item will be interpreted in IR as applying to all remotes covered by the RDF, while not all of the remotes in the RDF will necessarily have the (mo)dem. For example, the 15-1925 has the capability, while I think the 15-1918 & 15-1919 do not. Since IR does not care which of the 3 remotes is actually connected, this might mean we need to create another RDF for the two remotes that don't have a (no-mo)dem.

I noticed that also but took the "quick & dirty" approach. Rather than create more RDF's maybe we need to make the Parm positional like we did with the images for RDF's that support multiple remotes. Using your example for the 15-1925, 15-1919, 15-1918 it could be something like: WAVUpgrade=Yes,No,No if it has more than 1 remote supported.

After I hear from Rob I will upload a new set.

mr_d_p_gumby · Post by **mr_d_p_gumby** » Mon Jun 07, 2004 8:50 am

Nils_Ekberg wrote: Rather than create more RDF's maybe we need to make the Parm positional like we did with the images for RDF's that support multiple remotes. Using your example for the 15-1925, 15-1919, 15-1918 it could be something like: WAVUpgrade=Yes,No,No if it has more than 1 remote supported.

I had thought of that, too, but the problem is that IR does not select the individual remote like RM does. It only selects the RDF, so how would it know which of the positional arguments applied? Of course, you could put them in the RDF now in anticipation of IR being changed to do that, but I suspect it would be a fairly extensive mod that might not happen for a while.

Nils_Ekberg wrote:Rather than create more RDF's...

What, you don't want more RDFs to maintain?

Nils_Ekberg · Post by **Nils_Ekberg** » Mon Jun 07, 2004 9:01 am

mr_d_p_gumby wrote:I had thought of that, too, but the problem is that IR does not select the individual remote like RM does. It only selects the RDF, so how would it know which of the positional arguments applied? Of course, you could put them in the RDF now in anticipation of IR being changed to do that, but I suspect it would be a fairly extensive mod that might not happen for a while.

Good thinking. I did realize that and asked Paul to look at this thread to see if it could be handled by IR somehow. Even if it is just another question for the user when they select the WAV option and there is multiple parms. I suspect you are right that it could take awhile

mr_d_p_gumby wrote:What, you don't want more RDFs to maintain?

I guess I am just lazy

e34m5 · Post by **e34m5** » Mon Jun 07, 2004 12:51 pm

Well...I would prefer unique RDF's for each case. There is a whole lot of code in IR that handles this stuff and I am afraid that anything I touch could really break things.

So Nils has to create a few more RDF's..big deal

Nils_Ekberg · Post by **Nils_Ekberg** » Mon Jun 07, 2004 12:56 pm

e34m5 wrote:Well...I would prefer unique RDF's for each case. There is a whole lot of code in IR that handles this stuff and I am afraid that anything I touch could really break things.

Paul, You need to make sure of the impact on IR with having multiple remotes and RDF's with the same signature. The user would have to at best select the correct RDF EVERY time they download.

e34m5 · Post by **e34m5** » Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:03 pm

Hmm..good point. Give me some time to noodle on this...

Post by **The Robman** » Mon Jun 07, 2004 2:45 pm

mr_d_p_gumby wrote:3) A while ago, Rob posted his replacements for the Replay remotes. There still seems to be a lot of Replay RDFs, so maybe Rob can take a look & comment as to the validity of them..

The newer ones with 7 char signatures are the good ones, the older ones with 8 char sigs are the bad ones. I have just updated the RDF for the "unknown version", so grab the latest copy from the RDF folder.

mr_d_p_gumby wrote:4) The WAVUpgrade=Yes item will be interpreted in IR as applying to all remotes covered by the RDF, while not all of the remotes in the RDF will necessarily have the (mo)dem. For example, the 15-1925 has the capability, while I think the 15-1918 & 15-1919 do not. Since IR does not care which of the 3 remotes is actually connected, this might mean we need to create another RDF for the two remotes that don't have a (no-mo)dem.

Just FYI, the 15-1917, 1918, 1919 and 1925 all have modems, but the URC-7070, which also shares the same sig, does not.