CI conax module + valid card not working

[judge]

I can send any log you need.

Yes, a debug log with any issue is always handy. Please upload one.

[Rob van der Does]

CI+ modules will never work in any open source device; after all the whole point of CI+ is limiting users in hardware.
Having said that: many providers start with no limitations implied on CI+ when they introduce those modules. The idea of that is not to deter people from day 1 they use the module; later on they can and will enforce limitations.

For the rest: as I repeatedly tried to explain: CAM-support is entirely realised by the drivers, not by any other part of an image. So there is nothing we can do about that.
And as the use of any CAM will only limit users freedom, I don't consider CAM-support to be a real issue for any open box at all. We are happy to enjoy the freedom that SoftCams give us, and their support is clearly fine.

[kvarnstj]

I don't consider CAM-support to be a real issue for any open box at all. We are happy to enjoy the freedom that SoftCams give us, and their support is clearly fine.

Any encrypted channel you pay for legally, you will get on a card that will need a CAM module. Don't understand why the lack of this support is not considered to be a problem. Tell me how I can legally watch the channels I have paid for with only softcam support?
You keep saying

as I repeatedly tried to explain: CAM-support is entirely realised by the drivers, not by any other part of an image. So there is nothing we can do about that.

I keep saying, you don't need to touch the drivers as they work ok in all other images except VIX. There is nothing wrong with the drivers. It must be up to the image to use the drivers correctly, in order to get the channels visible . When I try to show the details of the CI module from the CAM menu, it just keep showing "waiting for CI". I also get the box to crash when choosing edit.
action -> OkCancelActions ok
[CI_Wizzard] FOUND 2 CI Slots
KEY: 352 OK
KEY: 108 DOWN
KEY: 108 DOWN
KEY: 352 OK
action -> SetupActions ok
[CI_Wizzard] selected CI Slot : 1
[CI_Wizzard_Config] Configuring CI Slots : 1
[2816L]
[CI_Wizzard_Config_CI1] read following CAIds from CI: [('0xb00', '2816', 1)]
[CI_Config_CI1] error parsing xml...
Screen <class 'Plugins.SystemPlugins.CommonInterfaceAssignment.p lugin.CIconfigMenu'>((1,), {}): <type 'exceptions.AttributeError'>
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/lib/enigma2/python/mytest.py", line 245, in create
return screen(self, *arguments, **kwargs)
File "/usr/lib/enigma2/python/Plugins/SystemPlugins/CommonInterfaceAssignment/plugin.py", line 159, in __init__
File "/usr/lib/enigma2/python/Plugins/SystemPlugins/CommonInterfaceAssignment/plugin.py", line 303, in loadXML
AttributeError: 'CIconfigMenu' object has no attribute 'read_services'
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/lib/enigma2/python/Components/ActionMap.py", line 48, in action
File "/usr/lib/enigma2/python/Plugins/SystemPlugins/CommonInterfaceAssignment/plugin.py", line 83, in greenPressed
File "/usr/lib/enigma2/python/mytest.py", line 330, in open
dlg.isTmp = True
AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'isTmp'
(PyObject_CallObject(<bound method ActionMap.action of <Components.ActionMap.ActionMap instance at 0x1eb4f80>>,('SetupActions', 'ok')) failed)
]]>

[Rob van der Does]

Sorry, but I can't explain it an clearer then I did already.

[zola25]

Sorry, but I can't explain it an clearer then I did already.

Sorry mate but its not that clear.
If he states it works with Black hole and the original Vu+ image and the old version of Vix then it cant be the drivers has to be something to do with the Zeus image

[Larry-G]

@ ALL read post 9 again, I understood what rob was saying perfectly.

http://www.world-of-satellite.com/sh...l=1#post279258

[Rob van der Does]

Sorry mate but its not that clear.
If he states it works with Black hole and the original Vu+ image and the old version of Vix then it cant be the drivers has to be something to do with the Zeus image

So what you say is that if drivers work fine in Windows Vista they're also fine for Windows7

[Creators]

... When I try to show the details of the CI module from the CAM menu, it just keep showing "waiting for CI".




The receiver does not recognize the module, try to Smit Conax CAM.

[Rob van der Does]

... When I try to show the details of the CI module from the CAM menu, it just keep showing "waiting for CI".
The receiver does not recognize the module, try to Smit Conax CAM.

Not the receiver, but the drivers.

[Creators]

Not the receiver, but the drivers.

Sorry, I quoted "kvarnstj",and so drivers do not recognize some manufacturers CAM's.

[kvarnstj]

drivers do not recognize some manufacturers CAM's

As I have stated before, same CAM module works in other images, so it's not that the driver couldn't handle it.
In CAM menu, it states "Conax 4.00" in Port1, however "waiting for CI" keep showing up. I have now swapped to BH image (where it works fine), and will stick with that unless CAM starts to work some day in VIX again.
If someone else have experiences with CAM modules, and how they work with e.g. Zeus, would be nice to hear.

[Rob van der Does]

As I have stated before, same CAM module works in other images, so it's not that the driver couldn't handle it.

As I stated before:

So what you say is that if drivers work fine in Windows Vista they're also fine for Windows7

I'm not sure which part of that isn't clear

[kvarnstj]

I guess what you are saying is that you can compare VIX with Win7, whereas the CAM drivers are made for Win Vista, and are not compatible anymore. However, you are then also saying, that all other images are still based on "Win Vista" (as the CAM works in e.g. BH), and VIX is the only one who have "moved on" ?
For the end-user to have a working CAM module solution, he needs to choose a image which is based on "Win Vista". What I am saying is that, it is a shame that you have moved on to, since the functionality I need is no longer working. Also I don't see any other benefit for moving on, since there is no new functionality along with the "Win7" uplift? As you have stated on Zeus home, end-user shall see no difference in Zeus compared to Vix 3.
In a nutshell.

[Rob van der Does]

BH and VTi are simply OI-images with a number of additional plugins embedded. OI is based on an approx 5 years old clone of DM's E2.

ViX (and a number of other PLi-based images) are not: they have evolved a long way from that, and are absolutely not comparable with the original E2 (based) images. Indeed: more or less the same as the differences between Windows XP and 8.
As long as VU creates drivers for a specific, and not for a general environment, issues like your actual one are bound to occur.

Long story short: all support for any CAM is in the driver, not in the image. Nothing we can do about that.
If you're not interested in the developments we've made since the 5 years old DM-cloned OI, you can use BH or VTi (or even OI).

[kvarnstj]

This is clear, thanks for comments.