Re: Didn't Work

Hi Larry,  thanks for getting back to us.

Woodgeard, Larry A wrote:

> I got the FreeGuide shortcut to work by adding "C:\Program
> Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_06\bin\javaw.exe" -jar before the command included
> with the shortcut.
>  
Yes, a similar change is planned for the next version.

> I am behind a firewall. I added http_proxy to the environment variables
> so I could connect.
>
> I still couldn't get xmltv to configure using the version in FreeGuide.
>  
What error messages did you get (in FreeGuide and/or outside of it)?

> I downloaded the latest standalone version of xmltv from sourceforge. I
> manually ran the configure successfully with that version
> (XMLTV-0.5.37-win32). I figured I should now be able to use FreeGuide
> with this version of XMLTV.
>
> I changed the default directories from your
> Tools/Options/Advanced/Directories to point to my working directory and
> version of XMLTV conf. Pleasantly surprised that the download worked
> fine.
>  
Good news.

> I've been playing around with it and it's pretty impressive. I
> especially like the configurable channels set. That was a nice touch.
>  
Glad you like it :)

> I think it would be fantastic if we had some sorting capability by
> channel. My download came all out of order by channel. It was a pain to
> have to create a channel set, and reorder the channels manually.
>  
Yes, we do plan to make it possible to re-order the default channel set 
without having to go through the whole process.

> Also, the left hand channel list is left justified and would be easier
> on the eyes with a few spaces from the left edge, or possibly consider
> centering it.
>  
Thanks for this.  I've added it to the TODO list.

> I didn't really get to test out your configure capability since I
> couldn't get the XMLTV version you have working. I'll play around with
> it some more when I get a chance.
>  
Please do, and send details of what is happening.  This should work with 
no problems at all.

> The Guide seems to be compute intensive. Maybe if the processes where
> backgrounded, they'd be nicer. I still think a C/C++ version would be
> more responsive. But I understand the desire to use Java. Java just
> doesn't run all the cleanly on the Microsoft OS.
>  
Yes, it does take quite a bit of CPU, and we have tracked it down to 2 
issues: first and most important is the fact that processing the XML is 
slow, and second there are a lot of label objects to be created.

I'm in the middle of a major re-write that provides mechanisms to 
improve both of those problems significantly.  The next major release 
should be a lot better, but at the moment my time is very limited, so it 
may not happen soon.

Andy


-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. 
http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/