Rockbox

This is the bug/patch tracker for Rockbox. Click here for more information.

Quick links: Bugs · Patches · Rockbox frontpage

Tasklist

FS#8122 - Tagnavi_custom don't works

Attached to Project: Rockbox
Opened by Dirk Schemionek (DirkS) - Friday, 09 November 2007, 09:05 GMT+1
Last edited by Marc Guay (Marc_Guay) - Monday, 31 March 2008, 20:33 GMT+1
Task Type Bugs
Category User Interface
Status Closed
Assigned To No-one
Player Type Sansa e200
Severity Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version Daily build (which?)
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Private No

Details

It is not possible to change the basic format declarations in the tagnavi with the tagnavi_custom file because the %include command is written after that basic declaration block.
Tested with Version r15525.
This task depends upon

Closed by  Marc Guay (Marc_Guay)
Monday, 31 March 2008, 20:33 GMT+1
Reason for closing:  Not a Bug
Additional comments about closing:  Comments indicate that this is simply the way it works.
Comment by Thomas Martitz (kugel.) - Monday, 12 November 2007, 01:12 GMT+1
According to the wiki, the %include command should be written before basic format declaratoins. But the tagnavi.config itselfs has it written after.
Comment by Robert Kukla (roolku) - Friday, 30 November 2007, 11:57 GMT+1
Where did you find that "the %include command should be written before basic format declarations"? This is not the case.

If it is moved before the format declarations you can't use them in the tagnavi_custom.config. You can however write your own format definitions for use in tagnavi_custom.config with different names.
Comment by Dirk Schemionek (DirkS) - Friday, 30 November 2007, 12:46 GMT+1
It is not possible to change the Basic format declarations by using the tagnavi_custom.config file if the %include command is written after the Basic format declarations-Block. E.g. try to change the length of tracknumbers from 2 to 3 digits and you will understand what i mean.
Comment by Robert Kukla (roolku) - Friday, 30 November 2007, 14:50 GMT+1
I understand perfectly and I never claimed it was possible.
Instead I justified the reasons why the current order is intentional and suggested an alternative solution.

Loading...