works like a charm. many thanks!
I feel like I am missing something obvious here. When I add the second "tuner" (source) I now have 480 more channels in my guide in the 11000 range (original set is 10,000 set in the docker run command).
bnhf/olivetin:latest (aka bnhf/olivetin:2026.02.27) pushed a few minutes ago with an updated Pluto-for-Channels Action. This now uses the @KineticMan fork, which includes single-account, single-M3U support for the latest changes to Pluto. Pluto account required. Supports up to 10 streams:
Use the Project One-Click Delete Action to remove any versions you currently have installed -- then run this Action.
1 Like
Totally agree.
I've been waiting for the dust to settle.
This topis (belonging to maddox) is all over the place with different projects.
Each developer should create their own topic for their project, like Bobby Vaughn did
Would also be nice if there was a maintained, locked topic listing all the project topics available.
I think if each project topic was tagged with some keyword, like project-topic a simple forum search would be able to list them all (like bnhf did for project-one-click)
You have to tell the Custom Channels source to use the channel numbers from the m3u. Otherwise, it gives them their own channel numbers.
Agreed, if the project is different. If it's a fork of this original project, then we should consolidate them into a single one.
1 Like
None of these forks are even actual forks. No wonder there hasn't been any contributions back. I guess they were just pushed up as their own fresh repo? 
The @joagomez Pluto-for-Channels is written in Python, so was not a fork of your project. @Bobby_Vaughn forked that, and @KineticMan forked that fork. I don't believe there was ever another project thread though, and each was published separately.
On a related subject, do you see an advantage to the multiple M3U and CDVR source approach you're using? I've tested the @KineticMan man approach, and that allows multiple streams with a single account and single CDVR source (I tested 3 concurrently).
Imagine setting up 8 of them and how many extra same channels I had 
1 Like
That's a lotta forking forks... 
You're not forking kidding! 
Ohhhhhhh. So weird it’s using the exact same name. Ok cool. I’ll check them out.
Nope. But it’s what fit with the current architecture of the project as explained above. And was able to be done in a short amount of time, and uses state from Channels DVR Server to ensure there’s never conflicts of sessions.
@Maddox Is there any way to get a unified guide? I usually go into the channels web ui and disable any channels I'm not interested in. But it seems like now I may have to do each source manually?
yeah it sucks, lol. This solution is not that great.
I'm going to try to level up the whole project to work more like the other one, and let you filter channels there. But now it feels like I'm doing what I was complaining everyone else was doing!
So maybe @KineticMan's version should be the defacto one. I'd suggest just using that one for now.
Mine just isn't set up for proxying like his is doing. It's going to take a fundamental change in how the project works.
1 Like
(post deleted by author)
Okay...I must have grown dense since I last set up the original version to run in Docker.
I have the zip file. I have Docker Desktop up to date and running.
I have been out here reading how to make the two work together and I can't figure it out. It just ain't gelling.
Is there a 'walk me through the setup like I'm five' set of instructions? I genuinely must be more stupid than I was, because I had no issue setting this up the first time.
Everything changes yet again soon as I wake up. 
So, the @Bobby_Vaughn Docker is now no longer being maintained (that I just setup yesterday and re-did all my fav etc) due to someone else making a better one??
I am not seeing a obvious thread or link to this new docker by @KineticMan.
EDIT: found the post buried from earlier. Would be nice to have that as its own thread...
Interesting to see Maddox docker do what he last posted about...but, I am not sure I want to setup multiple single tuners and have to deal with multiple channel lineups.
I find the @maddox solution quite a clever approach ... it basically let's Channels manager the streams as individual tuners. I tried it out with setting up 6 single channel sources and recorded 4 channels simultaneously...it worked great. The Pluto-for-Channels web screen is a nice touch.
It would be nice if it was handled similarly to HD Homerun (4 tuners), where we could just indicate the number of tuners/streams at 12 (or whatever) and the proxy would manage the tuners/streams...that would allow a single channel lineup. The interface to manager the tuners is already built into Channels, so it seems like the new proxy just needs to leverage that type of API to the proxy.
Looking forward to what's next on this evolution.