- This topic has 5 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Hi Folks,
I’ve added some audio streams to my database as described in the Streaming Audio HOWTO and can play the streams fine using my SB.
The thing I wonder about is, the order my SB displays the streams when selecting the playlist – it’s neither alphabetical nor by date.
So who’s responsible for the sorting order, the Server or the Client?
/T0m
Good question. mt-daapd sends them in the order they are specified in the playlist.
What the client does with them is it’s business. iTunes sorts them, but I don’t belive Roku does. So iTunes puts them in the order it feels is most appropriate, while the soundbridge displays them in the order that they come from mt-daapd.
Bottom line is that mt-daapd can “suggest” and order, but the client is ultimately responsible for determining order.
rpedde wrote:
Good question. mt-daapd sends them in the order they are specified in the playlist.
you’r right. I’ve created a static playlist pointing to the .url files – the roku displays the streams in the order they are in the playlist.
so the question is now:
what’s the order the url are added to the Smart Playlist?/t0m
In the smart playlists, the order is the order that it fetches it from the database, which, for gdbm, is whatever order it feels like.
If you are serving from a machine with some horsepower, you can go into the top of db-gdbm.c and change “WANT_SORT” from 0 to 1.
That will sort stuff by artist, album, track. But it pulls the entire database and does an insertion sort on it, so it will only work on a real machine with some ram, not a NSLU2.
— Ron
You might check your roku firmware. Seems like a recent-ish roku firmware update did sorting by track on the client-side.
Might be that an updated firmware will fix that.
Failing that, you’ll have to modify db-gdbm.c as mentioned above.
— Ron
Theoretically, yeah, but the 0.2.x codebase is pretty much unmaintained for a push to the 0.3.0 codebase… all the database stuff has been completely re-written with a sql backend, so it doesn’t make much sense to go mucking around adding features in it.
I had hoped for a 0.3.0-pre1 before the end of the year, but now I’m thinking late January?
— Ron
- The forum ‘General Discussion’ is closed to new topics and replies.