Custom_vendors.xml challenges

BHj

n3wb
Joined
Jan 27, 2019
Messages
10
Reaction score
8
Location
Finland
Hi @alexvas,

I wanted to add some commands to my new Dahua SD-49225T-HN. Worked pretty OK on the basics with one of the Dahua models, but thought I would notch it up a bit using the basedOn directive in the custom_vendors.xml setup. Unfortunately tinyCam seemed not to allow me to do so, saying there was no such camera. Is this supported and I am just using it wrong? If not, are you planning to support this method of enhancing cameras from the "standard pack" (vendors.xml) in custom_vendors.xml?

I eventually ended up creating the support from scratch. It is waiting for you in your inbox, incase you want to include it in the next release.

While doing so I would have liked to use more POST commands since that opens up better possibilities to handle the camera, but to do that the Dahua protocol seems to require to set up a session using a POST first, and I could not find how to get this session into the subsequent requests. Is there a longer list of special xml attributes than the one listed for custom_vendors that would give this option, or have you more or less abandoned this form of setting tings up after 2014 when the lash custom vendors changelog entry is from?
 

alexvas

tinyCam Developer
Joined
Sep 12, 2015
Messages
222
Reaction score
199
Hi,

I saw your email. I will include your xml into the next app update.
basedOn should work. I do not see any valid basedOn in your xml file that you sent me.
custom_vendors.xml is quite limited. It is not possible to provide there session ID.
 

BHj

n3wb
Joined
Jan 27, 2019
Messages
10
Reaction score
8
Location
Finland
Hi,

I saw your email. I will include your xml into the next app update.
basedOn should work. I do not see any valid basedOn in your xml file that you sent me.
custom_vendors.xml is quite limited. It is not possible to provide there session ID.
As mentioned in email, but also for others that might try it out; the implementation of 49225 in the new version of the app that is just out does not work well. Somehow the inclusion of my proposal has not come through as expected. I have sent a new version, based on the "basedOn" which should be in your inbox. As mentioned before, the basedOn does not work as edxpected for me, but maybe you are able to fix it or tell me what is wrong by using the file..
 
Top