cardmhz = -1 in WebInterface doesn't stick and defaults to 450.

[Bit]

Revision

<all>

Issue Description

<put cardmhz = -1 in a [reader] section of oscam.server file.
Restart oscam and take a look at the reader config page in web interface. cardmhz shows 450.>

When the issue occurs

<always>

How the issue is reproducable

<look at issue description>

PS: At MHz settings it's mentioned "Dreambox Mipsel: 2700, PPC: 3150" but
"DM7025: 8300"
is missing.

[FilipeAmadeuO]

See ticket 2827.
I had the same question...

[Bit]

Hmmm...
Should i close this ticket?
I'm convinced that it's a bug.
If I put -1 as value, it should stay as -1 and should not be overwritten by a default value.
Like this it's not possible anymore to change the card in the reader because there's now a value which s NOT "auto" anymore.

[FilipeAmadeuO]

Completely agree :)

[Deas]

it´s not overwritten with a default value, it´s the value the card gave back! so if you put in -1 the correct value is evaluated. and as long as you don´t save this is done every time you restart oscam. this is how it is implemented by theparasol (he said it somewhere here or in the forum). so it´s not a bug...

[Bit]

I'd like to have a comment from theparasol.
There's no reason for changing the value. If I'd like to have -1, I'd like to stick with -1.
-1 is what I put in and -1 should stay there until I(!) put another value. -1 is AUTO and auto is what I want.

[theparasol]

I can understand that, but I needed for correct timingcalculation the reader->cardmhz be filled with exact clockspeed instead of -1. So with readerinit reader->cardmhz is filled with exact cardclock. If user hits save button that value is saved in the configs instead of -1. Value is correct so its not a problem. How often do you change cards in the reader? I never. It can be fixed but to do that I'll have to introduce a new variable to hold actual clockspeed. Can also be fixed with auto box detection. Something else on my to do list.

[Bit]

So Ieave this ticket open until auto box detection?

[Deas]

i don´t think we need a ticket for something that is working as implemented to be a placeholder for a future improovement of oscam...