Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] squeezeboxserver does not work with Google Chrome?
On 12/20/2010 11:17 PM, bulletmark wrote: Can't find any other mention of this around here which is a little surprising? Is anybody else seeing this? No problems for me. I use Chrome 8.0.552.224 on Ubuntu 10.10 to access my SBS SBS is Version: 7.6.0 - r31644 @ Sun Dec 19 02:01:34 PST 2010 running on Debian -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Can I modify the server.prefs file?
On 07/25/2010 09:17 AM, garym wrote: I'm not a linux user, but I recall seeing similar posts and for squeezebox to see the files, squeezeboxserver is the user that needs the permissions (rather than you as the user). Pretty smart for a non-*nix person. Yes, permissions are very important. I have mine setup so that I (or my userid) owns the songs and covers, etc. and allow the squeezebox server user be a member of the group. So it uses the middle permission. All the server needs is read access to the files, and directory access (X) to the upper directories. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Cannot connect to database!
Well, I think it's gotta be some screwy Mandriva thing... I just nuked the root directory, installed Mandriva 2010.1 from scratch, followed by sbs 7.5.1 I ran my SBS on mandriva for years. Then they improved something and I could never get the update to work. This was years ago, so sorry that I don't remember what mandriva version and what SBS version was. I moved to pure Debian and have been on it for years. Its wonderful and since I run Ubuntu on my main desktop and laptop, all the tools I care about are there. I also like that Debian is more stable, releases are much less frequent. I keep my server in the basement and I don't want to touch it. It runs for months untouched. I just SSH in and do a apt-get update cycle periodically -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Cannot connect to database!
I agree that Mandriva used to be better than it is now... I've just used it for so long I'm hesitant to change. I completely understand. The good thing about having zillions of distros is that you can pick the one you like. I stayed with Mandriva at least a year for the same hesitant topic -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Questions re: Ubuntu and Squeezebox Server
On 07/08/2010 08:13 PM, kgturner wrote: I installed Ubuntu 10.04 on an older hard drive in anticipation of Is all this Linux stuff new to you? You probably have a permissions problem. Check carefully that the ownership and group links are right, and match the userid that SBS is running as. It will work great, but you need proper access up and down the whole chain. And if you have the music on a separate partition, you need to make sure that the disk is mounted properly and accessible to the userid that is running the server. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Questions re: Ubuntu and Squeezebox Server
Yeah, this is my first foray into Linux. Sometimes I wish it was less like Windows, so you'd be forced to think about the changes, being 99% the same can drive you nuts. But you'll get it, and linux/unix folks are glad to bring others over from the dark side. My SBS server is a junk old PC, current status is 21:04:34 up 57 days, 19:35, 1 user, load average: 1.08, 1.02, 1.01 I've had it go over a year untouched, always up. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Questions re: Ubuntu and Squeezebox Server
Thanks for all the help, Pat. One last questions (for now). How do I set permissions when I'm transferring files over a network from a Windows 7 machine to the headless Ubuntu server? It depends, but the best, cleanest way is to install Samba on the Ubuntu box. It implements standard Windows file sharing (and print sharing) so your windows users just see it as a standard Share that you can do standard drag and drop commands. Samba is actually named smb and you can have Synaptic install both the client and the daemon (smbd) for you automatically. Setup is not too complex, and I think there are now guis to handle the setup. You can use the network-Windows style password and username support, and it will look exactly like any other Windows server. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Ubuntu vs Fedora
gharris999 wrote: But I don't have much confidence that the hardware firewall on my very old nat router is impervious to attacks from the outside. So, my intention with that ubuntu firewall was to simply limit the number of ports that were open and to only accept traffic on those ports from the local subnet. This is dubious logic, I know, but what's the alternative? Not its not dubious. The chances that your very old NAT router is sufficient is vanishingly small. You want to close as many ports as you can, and run as few services as you can, on every computer in your network. Even a very expensive new commercial router, like Cisco sells to enterprises are not sufficient in themselves. They too need periodic attention and defense in depth. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Ubuntu vs Fedora
gharris999 wrote: Why this devotion to vi? Just because some version of vi has been included in every unix-like OS over the past 25+ years, and it works just fine over a TTY or command line. The more the visual editors require something like X-windows. Nano clearly follows the vi/vim mode, but its not much of an improvement over vi. With vi, you can go anywhere, it is always installed. I even install it on my Windows boxes. Again, one of the reasons I install the GUI for servers is that during setup, its nice to have a decent editor. I actually kinda like vi, but I started programming on a PDP-10, which used teco as an editor. Teco was the first that I used with the i for insert mode up until you enter escape, just like vi. While teco was not visual, it had an awesome macro/programming capability. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Ubuntu vs Fedora
gharris999 wrote: Not having much Ubuntu experience, do any of you care to enlighten me as to it's pros and cons vis a vis Fedora/CentOS? I'm not sure that there are a lot of real pros/cons. But I would strongly suggest you look at a pure Debian installation, rather than Ubuntu. I run Ubuntu on my laptop and desktop, but all of my servers are Debian. BTW: I always install the full GUI with the server, and then set the init level after its fully working. I find that for some things, the GUI is more accessible. The GUI software doesn't take up much disk space, and has no runtime impact when the init-level is GUI free. I prefer Debian because it does not change as often. I want my servers to be set and forget. With the desktop oriented distros (mandriva, ubuntu, etc.) they come out with new releases all the time, and support new hardware (webcams, fancy mice, etc.) that have no place in my servers. Its been years since I used RedHat/Fedora/CentOS heavily. Back then, the RPM process was not as well done as the Debian apt-get/Synaptic equivalent. Too often, I'd get into RPM interdependency hell. I have never had that problem with Debian. Or at least not once in the 6+ years of using Debian. Ubuntu changes a lot of stuff every six months. They move menus, change applications to do tasks, etc. I'm too much of an old dog, no new tricks for me. All IMHO, of course. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Ubuntu vs Fedora
JJZolx wrote: pfarrell;550760 Wrote: I prefer Debian because it does not change as often. Isn't that pretty much the exact reasoning behind Ubuntu's LTS releases? Same idea, but Ubuntu's LTS still change too frequently for my tastes. And worse, Ubuntu does only minimal updates to the LTS stuff. And for me, everytime I want to setup a new server, the LTS release is at end of life. Its a personal call, but I much prefer Debian over Ubuntu for servers. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Ubuntu vs Fedora
gharris999 wrote: Full blown Debian seems a little scary to me. There is a net install that is a single, small ISO, fits on a tiny CD. 2). No GUI. With all due deference to Pat, again, I spend too much time when setting up a Fedora server tweaking the GUI even though I know it will get used very rarely. No GUI == no frittering. Yeah, I know that song. Most folks need a bit of GUI, but since you are hard core, you know what to do. 1). Firewall not enabled out-of-the-box. Looks like I'm going to have to learn about both UFW and AppArmor. Lack of the firewall probably explains the faster network transfer times. Load up guarddog it a simple apt-get Er, well that needs a GUI. You can do manual IP tables, but Ubuntu really expects you to have a GUI, its a consumer OS. Pat -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Ubuntu vs Fedora
gharris999 wrote: I'm hardly hard core. I posses just enough Linux fu to be a danger to myself and others But with a server, about the only thing that I still regularly use the GUI for is MySQL user config...and I imagine that that isn't too much of a command line challenge once you get the hang of it. I agree, MySql admin setup is not a big deal from the shell. But setting up IP tables is deep voodoo, and for that, I need a GUI. At least, I do for all the ones that I've tried on Debian and Ubuntu Its not clear how badly you need a firewall/IP table setup for an internal server. One on the open net, that's another question completely. Sounds like you just need a bit of self discipline to avoid playing with the pretty colors on the GUI. You can, if you want, use apt-get to install the GUI and X-windows stuff, use it, and then have apt-get remove the temptation. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Ogg Vorbis Beta Encodings
JJZolx wrote: It might be possible to update the firmware to handle these files. Not on the ip3k units. New ones, there is a possibility. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Kubuntu 9.10 and SBS 7.5 and mysql again!
mudlark wrote: Why bravo? Pat hasn't answered my original question. Yes, I did. I said its low priority. Close to zero low. All of the SD/Logi engineers have been working on the Touch for a year, and the Radio got shoved in to the middle when the Touch was obviously a ton more work than initially estimated. Why does a major bug not get fixed? The bug applies to anyone using kde or gnome (AFAIK) which is most of linux for plebs, I would guess. I don't know but I can guess that anyone using debian would have exactly the same problem. I have not see any bugs with my Debian server, related to Mysql. I've been running beta versions of SBS for years. SBS depends on mysql so why doesn't the damn thing have it's dependencies working correctly with the production version of mysql? They don't expect you to use any version of MySql other than the one that is bundled with/by the .deb file. Easy question, and the answer doesn't relate to time issues, or any other crap just a bit of semi rational management. Most of (perhaps all) of the SD/Logi management was fired or reassigned to Siberia when the Touch effort was screwed up. I don't know the whole Logitech product line, but I have bought a lot of their products over the years, and all of the rest are much less software oriented. And none of the others have any explicit support for Linux, let alone Kubuntu. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Ubuntu 9.04?
humhead wrote: Perhaps you can help me here. How can I log into ubuntu as root? I don't think you can, most are setup to not allow root login. You can start a shell and do sudo su to have a root shell. And there is a add a root shell in the add panel section. You may have to fire up Alacarte to get access. Being root as a general idea is a really bad things, one of the things that Unix/Linux/OS-X do right and Windows does wrong. Usually, a better solution is to make sure that the file protections are setup properly. I read these forums using email, and I've lost the start of this thread. What are you trying to do, again? Thanks Pat -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Kubuntu 9.10 and SBS 7.5 and mysql again!
mudlark wrote: If a new user can't get the thing working easily from scratch the Linux is geekware gets thrown around. This bug is so easy to fix as it is just a dependency problem. So why hasn't it been fixed. The last thing I want is to complain and complain, but this has been going on for months now for no apparent reason. Wait a minutes. You say that you are not facile with Linux, and you are then complaining that SqueezeBoxServer is not as wonderful as you want? Can I ask why you are using Linux instead of Windows or OS-X or whatever you are facile with? linux users seem to me to be keen on the open source aspect and a good deal of them want to see distros become accessible to the person in the street. If the bug fixing is slapdash then . Open source software is about the people who use it making it better. The support for semi literates such as me is exemplary, but the linux experience isn't straight forward and it should be. I don't expect this to ever happen. It takes tons of engineering time and QA time and Product Management time to get the support/experience right. Firms like Apple and Microsoft have the resources and desire to do so for their products. There is no company with such resources anywhere in the same league as Apple or Microsoft. The geeks who develop Linux and the distros are geeks, they are not going to want to do this for free. I don't see it happening. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Kubuntu 9.10 and SBS 7.5 and mysql again!
mudlark wrote: I am well able to cope with kubuntu. It's not my experience I am trying to make a point about. You are defending the indefensible. A bug hasn't been fixed properly...I tried three times to get the situation resolved. What do I have to do? Just go away and make less noise? I'm not trying to defend anything, and I'm not trying to be negative towards you. But I don't at all understand what you expect. Have you seen the same issue with Debian? Is it just a Kubuntu issue? or more general? I run Debian for my servers, such as the one running SqueezeBoxServer. Support is expensive, and nearly all companies allocate support money in direct proportion with the number of users using that flavor. So most companies do something like 86% Windows, 14% OS-X, and a percent or so for all else. Kubuntu is a subset of Ubuntu, so its way under a portion of that one percent. Debian is where all the real work is done, and where all the testing is done. So I suggest you try it using Debian as part of the problem isolation. IMHO, the reality is that supporting assorted Linux distros is so far down the priority list that it is not going to happen except by luck. The Radio, which was released last Fall as a commercial product is riddled with bugs. They have not been fixed because all of the engineers have been working on the Touch. Now that the Touch is out, I expect that they will be beating down the production bugs in the Touch, and then get to the bugs in the Radio. There are, of course, still bugs in the Duet, Boom, and even Transporter. I expect that community support is all you will get. By the time the list is short enough, the Boom 2 and Touch 2 will be sucking all the oxygen out of the air. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Kubuntu 9.10 and SBS 7.5 and mysql again!
mudlark wrote: Are there no advocates for linux at Logitech headquarters? This is a rhetorical question, right? Its a long way from Logitech HQ to anyone working on Slim Devices hardware or software. I have been very happy with the support for Linux in general and Debian based distros in particular from the beginning, when I got my first SqueezeBox 1. I have always run my SlimServer on linux. But be real, Slim Devices was run by geeks, they sold out to Logitech years ago. Logitech is not a low volume, niche company. The server is open source. Patches welcome. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Multiple Squeezebox Server Instances
damcknight wrote: This is interesting. Looks similar to what I found on the Slimserver wiki. Perhaps I'll give it a shot and see what happens. Anyone know where I can find a list of all the Squeezebox Server options? The only up to date list is in the source code. Part of the good part of it being open source, is you can look at the source and not have to wait until some documentation folks keeps the documentation up to date. The down side is, of course, that the documentation folks are always behind the current software. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Multiple Squeezebox Server Instances
damcknight wrote: I want to have 2 separate music libraries for flac and mp3s. I like being able to quickly browse by artist, album, genre, and year from the main menu, but I don't want to have duplicates of half my music. I guess the other option is to use the Multi Library/Custom Browse plugins. Running two instances is not going to be fun. I'd look for alternative. The Touch can act as a normal Squeezebox player, Don't use iPeng, so I can't adress that, but I would expect it to work fine. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Speeding up web interface in Ubuntu
adamslim wrote: I would like to speed up the web interface and database queries, and wondered if moving some files to a ramdisk would help. (The machine is quite fast - Core2Duo, 4GB RAM, used only as a server and on 24/7). RAMdisk is rarely useful on modern OS, such as Ubuntu 9.10. Using one requires that you manually decide what files need to be in memory, and you make the general memory available smaller. Its nearly always better to let the operating system do the management. Again, clear instructions on how would be nice :) Its not clear what you think of as slow and what would need speeding up. Before you change anything, you should try to define what is slow and why, so you can make meaningful changes. How many albums do you have? how many songs? What do you think is slow? What formats? are you using iTunes? I've been running my SBS on a Debian server for ages (Debian is the father of Ubuntu). Its plenty fine for me. Sure, scanning takes a while, but I don't do it very often, so I don't care. The web UI is fast, as is the response on my Controller and my Touch. There is really no speed associated with playing music to a player, be it Classic, Transporter, Boom, etc. Rarely is the speed of the server an issue when you are streaming bits. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Speeding up web interface in Ubuntu
adamslim wrote: It's just the web interface, and especially when I'm doing more complex stuff with custom browse. Some of the database queries can take over 20-30s, and since I would like to run several queries (for example, first to get piano music, then instrumental rather than orchestral), it makes the whole browsing system less of a joy than it should be. 30 seconds per thing is way too slow for happy users. I have not looked at the way SBS talks to MySql recently (i.e. not in years). But in my 30+ years of optimizing systems using DBMS, the rules are nearly always the same. 1) create proper index structures so that you don't have to do table scans. 2) don't do four, five, or eight way joins. Sure, they are handy, but they don't scale and are always too slow. If you are doing a lot of custom browsing that does a lot of sql queries, I'd start there. While my collection is less than half the size of yours, ~800 artists, 10,000 songs, the DB is tiny. only about 220K I know that MySql will attempt to cache tables into memory, and with a 4GB machine, it all should be in memory all the time. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Has the Debian/Ubuntu repo moved?
tcutting wrote: I think the problem is with another of the repos for Ubuntu - when I did the apt-get update a couple of days ago it also hung in the middle of the update, but I think it had already gotten info from the slim repo. I've seen that as well. the update zooms through 50 repos, and than takes several minutes for one. Perhaps some Debian/Ubuntu repos is way overloaded. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Linux Intel Atom 330 server - Power consumption
Jay_S wrote: In all, I *love* my D510MO. Very cool build article. The MB looks kinda silly, or at least lonely, in that huge case. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Network configuration question: better asking here?
audiomuze wrote: If I'm not mistaken, using DHCP makes me reliant on having a DHCP server up at all times, whereas currently I can just turn on those devices I want to work with and my switch and I know they'll see one another. Yes, you really need two DHCP servers for a robust network. I run two, one on my SqueezeBoxServer computer, and another on my firewall/DMZ to the internet. Since I leave both of those computers on 24x7, it suits me well. I learned yesterday that my ADSL router supports binding MACs to IPs, which would I guess give me one place to manage the lot, and presumably automatically provides gateway and DNS info, so this may be an option. Which really says that your router implements a DHCP server. It is still technically a single point of failure, but most homes have that, one cable/fiber/DSL link to the 'net -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Network configuration question: better asking here?
audiomuze wrote: Got to say, Network Manager's been my single biggest gripe about Ubuntu. It's been unreliable in a number of releases. One or two releases ago I could not get 2x static IPs going no matter what I tried and how many websites I consulted discussing the same problem. It's been stable and predictable in Karmic thus far, but the UI could do with further improvement. You are right, its a mess. They are trying to do something userfriendly like Windoze has, but networking is not easy, and Linux/Unix have always had many way to set things up. Sometimes its like juggling running chainsaws, but that is the cost of freedom. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] SCC 7.4.1 can't see my USB drives?
snarlydwarf wrote: Hint: SBS is NOT an application. It is a server. The name is a hint too, the initial name was slimserver, then the marketing folks thought SqueezeCenter was better, but it was not, and now its SqueezeBoxServer. Its a server, as @snarly says. SBS is NOT an application: it is a server. It should be run at system startup, not when you happen to log in to an X session at the console. And on my Debian system, it gets started by the init.d scripts just like all the other servers, mysql, apahce, bind, dhcpd, postfix, spamassassin, etc. And it (sbs) works great on my system -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] New Install of Squeezebox server
VaineDragon wrote: Here is the issue I have, when I installed it before it worked from Hostname, IP Address or the Domain Name, now I can only connect to it directly on the server? Exactly what error message are you seeing when you try. What is the client OS that you are using to test? -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Install Ubuntu Server from USB CD-ROM drive
aubuti wrote: Taking a different tack, I don't know anything about that mobo Another different tack: get the current Debian distro's ISO for 32 or 64 as your wish. Debian typically does not support the latest and greatest hardware, but its what @snarly and I run on our SqueezeBoxServers. Just click on all when you install it, and it will include X-Windows and the GUI stuff, its nearly the same as Ubuntu. @snarly will say turn off all the X-windows and GUI crap, which is true for a real server, but for folks using their first Linux, I find the GUI handy for setup. You can always turn off Xwindows later when its all working. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] New Install of Squeezebox server
VaineDragon wrote: There are no errors, when I try to connect via the Softsqueeze software it will not connect well, that is not very useful. Try it by hand. Fire up a cmd shell. The basic HTTP request is made by telneting to port 9000 of what you think the IP address is. and entering the command, terminated by two blank lines: GET / HTTP/1.0 -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] SCC 7.4.1 can't see my USB drives?
probedb wrote: snarlydwarf;495888 Wrote: I would agree that the pretty UI that Ubuntu insists on giving you is broken: it should be possible to mount an external drive as part of the boot process. For some things, you may just have to break down and do it by hand, though, I don't use ntfs so no interest in figuring out how to make it behave correctly with permissions, which is your problem. Then kindly leave this thread as that's it's entire point or I'm going to ask a mod to lock it! You don't like his answers and you want him to leave? I'm missing something here. @snarly is explaining security considerations that have been developed over 30 to 40 years. You don't like them, and want to limit his speach? Others may be interested in his explanations. While @snarly is talking about Debian and @probedb is talking about Ubuntu, the simple fact is that Ubuntu is Debian with some user friendly stuff. Perhaps Logitech should actively release code separately for Debian and Ubuntu, but I don't expect that to ever happen. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] SCC 7.4.1 can't see my USB drives?
hungarianhc wrote: I really hate my implementation of chmod'ing the files. Is there an fstab setting that will make everything all better? fstab is pretty much unrelated to chmod. You should not have to do it more than once in a lifetime, if Logitech would stop renaming the server software and changing the userid that the daemon runs as. What don't you like about issuing one recursive chmod in the lifetime of a disk drive? And even when Logitect makes life harder for us, its usually fixable with a recursive chown -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] SCC 7.4.1 can't see my USB drives?
hungarianhc wrote: pfarrell;495905 Wrote: What don't you like about issuing one recursive chmod in the lifetime of a disk drive? I use rsync to keep my music in sync. I believe that running a recursive chmod will modify the files, and rsync will then overwrite them again, and I'll be back where I started again. Right? I don't know, but it would be easy to test. I think rsync uses a md5sum or shasum rather than just looking at the ownership/premissions. While I use rsync fairly heavily, I don't change ownership. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] SCC 7.4.1 can't see my USB drives?
snarlydwarf wrote: pablolie;495755 Wrote: As to permissions, and package that is installed by the admin id ought to be smart enough to make sure that sufficient resource permissions are awarded to it for system wide operation. Otherwise the installation procedure can only be regarded as buggy. That's not how Unix permissions work. For good reasons. @pablolie, the make it work system wide is the root cause of many of the Windows malware problems that have cursed the industry. Adopting those mistakes for good OS is a really bad idea. SBS's installation from a .deb has no clue where your music library is. That is set by the user later, It should not willy-nilly be guessing oh, you have an external USB drive,let me change permissions on it! That would be a huge violation of debian security policy But, while I agree that the current Debian policy is right, Ubuntu is trying to be all things to all people coming over from Winders. These people have no clue what a decent security policy is. And to be fair, the introductory documentation that the tiny percentage are likely to find won't point all this out. Ubuntu 9.04 and later 9.10 added a bunch more aparmour stuff, which futher muddies the security/permissions waters. I think a more fundamental problem is showing up here. In the olden days, only geeks ran Linux, be it RedHat, Debian, etc. And the hacker ethos at SlimDevices said sure, its perl, it runs on whatever you have But as the SqueezeBoxen are moved more mass market by Logitech, and as Ubuntu is pushed as more acceptable in the tech media, there are going to be ever more users who are first time users with Ubuntu or similar distros. And its just not going to be plug and play for 90% of them. The only way out of this that I can see is for Logitech to put a ton more effort into the setup scripts and documentation for all the zillions of combinations of distros and hardware. I don't see this happening. I would expect that Linux support will stop before they can put that much effort into it. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] squeezeboxserver_7.4.2~29536_all.deb doesn't start
blazerte wrote: Just tried the latest V7.4.2 R29572 and it seems to be working ok now, at least with 10 Dec version of Debian's testing. I'm beta testing, so far, squeezeboxserver (7.5.0~29581) is working fine on my Debian box -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Can't access external HDD in Squeezebox Server
gungrog wrote: Bye bye windoze Any one got a Linux recommendation for something to replace EAC for ripping to FLAC? Depends on what you want. If you still have a Windoze desktop, you can just rip on the Winders machine, and send the files to the server. Samba is very good for making Linux disks look like Windows shares. This is really handy of the Linux server is in the basement, closet, etc where you don't want to touch it. There are a bunch of extract/compress programs for Linux. I use whatever is handy, which with Ubuntu seems to change every release. None are exactly the same as EAC. Perhaps EAC will run under wine... -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Advice on server (debian or freebsd)
robsic wrote: I'm planning to move my existing Squeezeboxserver/Ubuntu-Karmic into a more stable server environment, such as FreeBSD or Debian. Apart from the Squeezeboxserver, I also have a webserver, Samba, DNS/DHCP and local email services running. Now I'm looking for advice, considering the operation/maintenance of the Squeezeboxserver. What is the pros and cons for Debian and FreeBSD? I'm a Debian for servers, Ubuntu for desktops guy, I don't have any real experience with the assorted xBSD (freeBSD, NetBSD, etc.) I have a good friend who swears by the xBSD code, philosophy, etc. I will repeat my standard advice for distro picking: Find a buddy using what you are thinking about. Buy them a beer. Pick their brain. That way, you can get help for the price of a beer. I run all those kinds of services on my servers, and even a NNTP pool. Works fine. I like Debian because synaptic makes installs easy. As an aside, I strongly suggest postfix over sendmail for a mail server, as the configuration files of postfix can be read and understood by humans. Part of my setup is that I have two servers with DHCP (rollover, backup, etc.) , and I assign fixed IP addresses to all my computers, squeezeboxen, etc. based on their MAC addresses. Then I have the bind server resolve the addresses to nice human host names. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Advice on server (debian or freebsd)
epoch1970 wrote: Debian sometimes get adamant over licensing problems nobody cares about. I am *pissed* having to recompile netatalk to make it work with mac clients, just because someone decided linking with ssh taints the license. Its almost a cult with the folks who support/commit. Makes no sense to most outsiders. I agree that the documentation has not kept up. The good news is that nearly all Ubuntu documentation works. I tend to not care too much about distro-specific documentation, probably because its just a server and once its setup, I don't mess with it. I go to Apache for apache documentation, Postfix for that, etc. Ubuntu LTS is a valid option. Just install the server flavor and tell it to install everything, all the GUI stuff too. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] 64 bit Ubuntu with SBS 7.4.1 and USB drive
pablolie wrote: Indeed many of us have had to fight epic battles as we upgraded to later Linux versions (Ubuntu 9.10) and 7.4.1... I wouldn't say mine was epic, but moving to 7.4.beta on my Debian system was not lots of fun. Joys of beta and all that. The 7.5 beta is a ton easier path. Your information is valuable - once the dust settles with major upgrades in both Ubuntu and SBS (can anyone say 8.0) we truly should all help in rewriting the wiki, which seems a tad dated in several areas when it comes to Linux distributions. Real men run Debian on their servers. Looks tons like Ubuntu, but is more stable (i.e. changes more slowly). I think even 7.5 when its released will justify some changes to the Wiki. At least for me the 7.4 to 7.5 upgrade was pretty easy. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] 64 bit Ubuntu with SBS 7.4.1 and USB drive
pablolie wrote: Real men run Debian on their servers. Looks tons like Ubuntu, but is more stable (i.e. changes more slowly). I have been checking out Debian and may make the plunge. My issue is that whatever I chose also doubles as my early morning web browser, so a decent GUI is a requirement, and Ubuntu makes it so easy (and happens to be based on Debian of course). But I have no religion there. Ubuntu is more user friendly, but Debian has the same basic UI, all the tools. Some stuff is a bit wierd, they don't call it firefox they call it iceweasel for legal reasons. But all the important GUI stuff, specifically Synaptic, is there. Ubuntu adds drivers for more consumer stuff more quickly, like webcams, etc. but my servers barely have a keyboard. I've got a 8 port KVM so the one monitor, keyboard and mouse is shared. 7.5... isn't it 8.0 that supposedly will be required to support the SBTouch sometime this month? I guess I am a tad confused by all the parallel releases... I can't keep up either. I'm beta testing 7.5 and a Touch. It all works. I don't have any insight into what names or dates will happen. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Can't access external HDD in Squeezebox Server
gungrog wrote: complete linux newbie who desperately wants to persevere with it but will be forced back to Windoze if he can't use his squeezebox in Ubuntu! Oh no, anything but that. except for one thing, and it's a show-stopper for me. I can't set squeezeserver to point at my music library, which is on an external USB hard drive. The problem is that you need to mount the USB disk and make sure that the permission are properly setup. I run Ubuntu's daddy, Debian, and have only internal disks, so I can't help with the specifics. But there is a way. You might want to check the Ubntu forums. There are tons of very knowledgeable and helpful folks there. Just ask about automatically mounting your USB external disk, I'm sure they know the exact steps. http://ubuntuforums.org/ -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Ubuntu 9.10 and SBS 7.4.1 experiences?
pablolie wrote: One sweet day we'll have to stop to gksudo around editing system files to get stuff to work darn it... I mean, this stuff *should* work automatically... For sure. The Linux world can't expect acceptance with all this manual twiddling. I haven't run into this, but all my disks are EXT3. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Server won't start on openSuse 11.2
Jim Flanagan wrote: Hi. I have been running squezecenter on openSuse 11.1 and previous with minimal problems. I just upgraded my maching to openSuse 11.2 and it won't run. I first downloaded and installed the squeezeboxserver 4.4.1-1 rpm and it installed fine. First question: which version did you download? My guess is that the startup script scheme has changed in oS 11.2, but I don't know how to track that down. Any advice?? have you looked at or for the logs. Depending on which version of server, it may be named squeezecenter or squeezeboxserver and obviously, you need to run the startup script that matches the name you want to run. I'm debian, not Suse, so I can't do details for you, but the move to 7.4 brought a new name and a non-trivial amount of setup/startup issues -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Server won't start on openSuse 11.2
Jim Flanagan wrote: squeezeboxserver 4.4.1-1 as I stated above er, that doesn't sound right. The current production release is 7.4.* /etc/init.d/squeezecenter start returned 7 (program is not running): I tried both, the old one and the new one, both fail with the same error. Technically, that is an error that the stop part of the start/restart logic didn't find anything to stop. And if its failing that is not a particularly useful message, you know its not running, what you want is why is it not running. For that you need to find the logs -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Server won't start on openSuse 11.2
Jim Flanagan wrote: /var/log/messages shows now mention of it trying to start. Is there another command line to try to start it other than in /etc/init.d ?? Well, in debian, there are lots of logs. a 7.4.* version would try to create a squeezeboxserver.log somewhere in the /var/log tree, altho some version put it in /tmp on my debian system, there is a /var/log/squeezeboxserver directory with several log files for different parts. Of course, if the directory was protected from whatever user your /etc/init.d script is trying to use, there won't be any tracks If you read (or use vi) the startup script, you can usually figure out what it is actually doing. it probably sets up environment variables and executes squeezeboxserver_safe so you can locate or find to find that file. in Debian, its in /usr/sbin which is *not* in the default user path. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Server won't start on openSuse 11.2
I'm flying blind here, I can't spell Suse, but Jim Flanagan wrote: (442) FATAL: Couldn't connect to database: [Can't connect to local MySQL server through socket '/var/lib/squeezecenter/cache/squeezecenter-mysql.sock' (2)] so in a shell, type mysql and see what it says and then mysql mysql also check ownership premissions on the directory /var/lib/squeezecenter/cache/ and all the higher directories, specifically for whatever userid is being used for squeezecenter BTW, squeezecenter is the 7.3.* name, it is older and now obsolete squeezeboxserver is the current name. You may want to do all this effort on the latest version -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Server won't start on openSuse 11.2
Jim Flanagan wrote: For what it's worth, here is what I get just now running mysql: j...@linux-51m4:~ mysql ERROR 2002 (HY000): Can't connect to local MySQL server through socket '/var/run/mysql/mysql.sock' (2) j...@linux-51m4:~ mysql mysql ERROR 2002 (HY000): Can't connect to local MySQL server through socket '/var/run/mysql/mysql.sock' (2) j...@linux-51m4:~ You should fix the protection problems that are not allowing this to work. I think I shall give it a rest for the evening and look more into it tomorrow. Thanks for the help. Good plan, you are welcome -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Ubuntu newbie question
maggior wrote: partition as small as you can. I have my OS (Open SuSE 11.0) running on an 8GB flash drive and it is only 1/3 full. I don't have all of the desktop stuff installed though. For a server, you don't really need it. While I agree that servers don't need all the desktop or even GUI stuff, I find that for newbies, as the OP says s/he is, that the UI makes initial setup a lot easier. Once you get past newbie status, its easy to live with a lean and mean system. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Squeezeboxserver - Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic, crash
mudlark wrote: I would suggest that people using ubuntu or kubuntu should hold back from 9.10 until this issue has been dealt with. (unless you can fix the problem yourself). This is good advice in all cases. Let someone else be the first to install a new release. Wait a month and someone else will have found most of the bugs. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Starting Squeezecenter
Bruce S. wrote: Playing music now. Can you please open an issue in bugzilla and enter as much info as you can remember? It will greatly help the developers know that there are problems -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Starting Squeezecenter
Bruce S. wrote: Due to unrequested updates to Squeezecenter via a yum update - Can you tell what it updated to? 7.4 perhaps? There is a non-trivial issue in the Debian world where the name change from SqueezeCenter to SqueezeBoxServer has caused more than a few problems. This happens if you delibrately or accidentially move to 7.4 There is no SqueezeCenter in 7.4, so you can't start it. There is a SqueezeBoxServer, and usually it will start right up. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Starting Squeezecenter
Bruce S. wrote: I just did a whereis squeezecenter and got nothing but I did get an answer to whereis squeezeboxserver. So the yum apparently is behind this? Is this helpful? I won't go as far as to say yum is behind it all, but if you have a squeezeboxserver then something is moving you to 7.4 so you have to do a logical s/squeezecenter/squeezeboxserver/ on all the usual places. Starting with /var/log see if you can detect any attempts to run it. Also check your /etc/passwd or whatever your distro uses to define users. There were reports of the install not getting all the startup scripts right, setting the owner/user privs, etc. right. I don't speak much in the redhat/fedora/centos space anymore, so I can't do more specific stuff. But snoop around There might even be a startup script in the usual place, /etc/init.d/ or whatever your distro uses. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Starting Squeezecenter
Bruce S. wrote: I am dead in the water because I have no way of starting up squeezeboxserver. At least I don't know how to do that. There is no squeezeboxserver reference in the /etc/init.d directory. Is there a way to get rid of squeezeboxserver and re-download/install squeezecenter until this is fixed? Can you get yum to remove it? Clearly you can find the directories, and simply do an rm -rf on it. The old versions are availble on the slimdevices.com website. You should be able to find an RPM version easily -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Squeezeboxserver Stop Start
slinkeey wrote: No sense is wasting resourced while I am away from my squeezebox or not using it. er, why bother? If there is nothing calling the MySql daemon, it doesn't do anything, and as soon as its doing that, it can be swapped out. It ends up not doing anything, not taking memory, no real CPU cycles. Just let it run and you can play music anytime you want, no waiting. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Squeezeboxserver Stop Start
slinkeey wrote: Really? It gets swapped out of memory and when not being hit? MySQL doesn't have anything polling i take it? It might, but not enough to notice. Mostly it waits on its socket for an incomming command, and when you are not sending it commands, its doing nothing. We are talking Linux/Unix here, not some other OS that is popular but has idiotic memory management. I run my SqeezeCenter/Slimserver/SqueezeBoxServer on an ancient PC that is in my basement. It doesn't get touched for weeks at a time. My daughter gave up on it as being too slow something like five years ago. I run backup versions of DHCP and DNS for my house, and samba to share files with the Windows machines in the house. But mostly I ignore it. For me, the hassle of doing anything to the box overwhelms my desire to forget that its there. I had an earlier one, that I forgot so long that the CPU fans filled with fur balls and stopped, which burning out the CPUs. Otherwise, I'd probably still be running on that last century P3-700 or maybe it was a P3-500. Who can remember. I think the current SqueezeBoxServer was some sort of mid-one-plus GHZ AMD, whatever was fairly cheap six years ago There are folks running SqueezeBoxServer on shiva plugs, and fan-less VIA cpus that are under a gigahertz. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Problems with Ubuntu 5.10 Breezy Badger
jku wrote: As you've probably found out, with Ubuntu you have three sane choices: * dist-upgrade every six months * use long term support releases and dist-upgrade every 18-24 months * use long term support releases and re-install every 5 years (for server) I don't think these options are unreasonable and they clearly show how your comment doesn't paint the whole picture. I think the options aren't clearly communicated to people installing, though. Yes, there are these choices. But IMHO, you are better off with Debian, which naturally values stability and long term support when you are doing a server. My slimserver/squeezecenter/squeezebox server is a Debian install. The update every six months and never skip a cycle is not a good choice for a server. My music server stayed up over a year, no crashes and no touching by a human. For servers, a Ubuntu LTS is clearly better than their latest and greatest general packaging. But I prefer Debian for servers. Same cost, 99% the same GUI, 100% the same admin tools. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Problems with Ubuntu 5.10 Breezy Badger
0xdeadbeef wrote: The Ubuntu ones. the time, they are the same, but Debian is all about stability and long term support, whereas Ubuntu is about a new version every six months It wouldn't have changed anything, would it? Still the new binary package would not run on an ancient Debian. I expect it would as the Debian folks don't consider a couple of years ago to be ancient history. Its the Ubuntu folks who keep running forward. Your 5.10 is ancient, specifically four and a half years old. Well, ancient is a relative term. If I would have decided to install XP when I setup my MP3 server, I wouldn't have been forced to reinstall a new OS to update an application. Perhaps, but in Ubuntu land, even a year is too old to expect support. I had problems with upgrading a 7.10 to 8.04, and so held off until 8.10 was out and patched. Then I found that you can/could not upgrade from 7.10 to 8.10, you had to do the incremental steps. Made me really grumble. When I was doing serious Windows development, I would schedule time to do a format c: and reinstall from the CD every six months or so. I only reinstalled XP twice since I bought it several years ago and both times it was because of a complete hardware change. Users don't have to reinstall as often as developers do, but even for casual use, the Registry and DLL hell drive me to trash it every few years. I don't do professional development on Windows anymore, so my frequency of format c: reinstall is a lot lower. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Problems with Ubuntu 5.10 Breezy Badger
0xdeadbeef wrote: Ok, never mind. I'm updating to Ubuntu 9.04 right now and hope that 7.4 will run there. It should, especially since you are willing to nuke your old installation. The transition from 7.3 to 7.4 on Debian/Ubuntu was a bit rough in the beta days, but I would expect a clean install to work directly. Make sure to verify that your music directories are accessible by the user/group that the SBS runs as. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Problems with Ubuntu 5.10 Breezy Badger
0xdeadbeef wrote: Guess this will be the last time that I install Linux though. It's cool that it's free and all, but it completely sucks that you can't simply update an application without risking to destroy or being forced to update the whole system just for one application. It's also unbelievable that the repositories are deleted so soon. Which repositories do you mean, the Ubuntu ones? or the Logitech ones for your ancient Ubuntu 5.10? In either case, I'm not sure I agree with your complaint. If you want long term support, you should be running Debian, not Ubuntu. For 99% of the time, they are the same, but Debian is all about stability and long term support, whereas Ubuntu is about a new version every six months and supporting the latest and greatest stuff. Your 5.10 is ancient, specifically four and a half years old. When I was doing serious Windows development, I would schedule time to do a format c: and reinstall from the CD every six months or so. The SqueezeBoxServer 7.4 was one of the more difficult ones, I've been running it (under various names) for five or so years. Usually only the integer number changes are this painful. wasn't there a bad PGP key with the values 0xdeadbeef a decade or so ago? -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] 7.4 upgrade for Ubuntu - Wishful thinking?
aubuti wrote: So I'd go ahead and update now. To try to avoid some hassles I'd recommend the following: In addition, check the ownership of your music library. I had all of mine owned by me, and grouped to squeezecenter. Since the upgrade changes the username and thus the group, the SBS could not read my music library. This was true in the beta a while back, and if you have problems with zero songs in zero albums, its a good place to start -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] just curious about performance
Mine is a model name : AMD Athlon(tm) 3000+ cpu MHz : 2166.528 bogomips: 4337.62 It has one GB of ram, nothing special. The box used to have six IDE disks, from when a 80GB disk was state of the art. These days, there is one SATA disk @ 300GB and some smaller IDE disks. ~800 albums with 10444 songs by 531 artists. all flac -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] just curious about performance
SuperQ wrote: I've run squeezecenter on completely under-powered machines like P2/P3 ~500mhz. BTW, bogomips is just like it says. Bogus. It's a completely useless non-metric of anything. Unless you have a gigantic 1000+ album collection, any PC will handle squeezecenter just fine on Linux. Of course its a bogus metric. But its easy to get. I would not call 1000+ large, since I have 800+ I will claim that having one or more SqueezeBoxes causes you to buy more CDs. I ran for years on a P3-500 and it was fine. I think memory is much more important than CPU speed. The more recent versions of SqueezeCenter/SqueezeBoxServer take more resources than older versions, feature creep and all that. Its expected that SBS 8.0 will reduce the requirements once its released, but I don't expect it until late this year or early next. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Working on optical disc backup script
maggior wrote: I currently have a work-in-progress set of Perl scripts to automate the backing up of a music library to DVD or any other removable media (BD, DVD-DL, etc.). I agree with JJ here, too much masochism for me. I have ~810 albums, all in flac. Assume that the flac compression makes one CD take 333 MB, or 3 CDs per GB. Thus we have 270 GB of music to back up. I would be unwilling to do that even if they were BlueRay and you could put 27GB on each. That would take ten disks in the insert/burn/remove/label shuffle. With a 500GB disk selling for well under $100, just use rsync -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Finally... back!
pablolie wrote: system on a RAID primary drive (more of a hassle than it is worth is my preliminary opinion) and the primary drive is an SSD. I would think that an SSD for a Unix SlimServer is seriously overkill. I just have a gig of RAM and all is wonderful. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] How do you run on Linux
Teus de Jong wrote: Thank you very much gharris. I was a bit confused by the recent name changing and had squeezecenter replaced by squeezebox instead of squeezeboxserver. All seems well now. Be careful if you are using the 7.4 version. They are changing the name, and its a bit up in the air right now. Some things were broken this past weekend, such as the username that the server runs under. This can cause problems with permissions. I'm sure it will settle down in the next weeks -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] How do you run on Linux
Bruce S. wrote: I'm good. You guys are better!! This is one of the very best things about the SqueezeBoxen lines. The community really helps. While he is retired now, up until he did (a few months ago) Sean, the inventor and designer of the hardware would answer questions, show layouts, parts, etc. Amazing. Glad you got it working. My music server (nee slimserver, now SqueezeCenter) just runs untouched for ages. Pat -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] SC+Debian=Trouble?
paulster wrote: The answer to your original question is that SqueezeCenter plus Debian doesn't equal trouble! It's a really solid platform to run it on, in my experience. My uptime is at 111 days currently and it's only that short because I did a Kernel upgrade and had to reboot back then. I agree, my two servers run pure Debian and work great. Both are in the basement, and I never have to touch them. Uptime runs of 100s of days are frequent. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] How do you run on Linux
Bruce S. wrote: Now, I can't select the drive where my music files are located. Is this drive on the machine? or perhaps Samba or NFS mounted remotely? -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] How do you run on Linux
Bruce S. wrote: I got the download/install part done OK but I have no idea how to get this thing to run on Linux. How do you do it? The current name, even on Windows, is SqueezeCenter. The wiki tells you how to use the GUI downloader to install it on debian, ubuntu and related distros. And there are similar instructions for RedHat, Fedora, Mandriva and other RPM based distros. I run mine on Debian these days, and the installation system does everything you need, including all the dependencies and the automatic startup. So once its installed, my system just starts SqueezeCenter automatically, and I never even think of it. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Ubuntu install no go.
Nuuk wrote: :/etc$ cd /apt bash: cd: /apt: No such file or directory :-( Linux is very picky about names and slashes. cd /apt is not at all the same as cd apt I think that you are better off using Synaptic's GUI to do all this, since you don't seem to be familiar with shell commands. The GUI handles a lot of the syntax for you. But this thread has both Synaptic and shell command, as some folks use one or the other. In my Synaptic GUI, I sometimes get different results in the search box in the tool bar and in the pop-up dialog that I get when you click on the search icon (which looks like a document and a magnifying glass). In my 9.04 system, there is a meta package, named mysql-server in the results of searching for mysql. That is the one you need. altho I always install the mysql-client as well, but its not required by SqueezeCenter -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Error installing on Ubuntu / Jaunty
milosz wrote: I figured it out. I needed to enable the third party package repositories and then packages for the missing dependencies was automatically downloaded and installed. You can also just add the Logitech/SlimDevices repository to your Synaptic list, and it will all be automagic. Including updates. I'm sure that the site or wiki has the proper line for apt-get/synaptic -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Advantages of Linux over XP?
Goodsounds wrote: 2. Linux users are very overrepresented in these forums God, you are a blowhard. This is the Unix section. Anyone with half a brain would expect that nearly everyone in the Unix section is a user of, or interested in, Unix/Linux/BSD -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Advantages of Linux over XP?
radish wrote: In general (and this is an area I do know a little about!) performance on a non-memory starved machine will be the same between 32-bit and 64-bit OS installs (as largely backed up by those links). That has been my experience as well, sometimes the 32 bit wins, as the working set of the memory image is smaller (half the size). 64 bit wins when you have lots of memory and can use it rather than touching the disk. With enough memory, you can load a whole database (say MySql as used by SqueezeCenter) into memory. That is way fast. Since the SC is usually a very light load (except scanning) I would not expect a difference. Its interesting how the definition of lots of memory changes. I refused to use a PC until it could multi-task, which realistically meant 2MB for Windows 2.11. The first PC I bought for my home in 1990, had 5MB and all my friends asked what in the world are you gonna do with all that memory? By 1992, beta testing NT, you had to have 32MB to run it. The latest Intel CPU chips want three sets of physical memory, and the sweet spot is 6GB in three sticks of 2GB each. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Advantages of Linux over XP?
milosz wrote: I looked at the FAQ and there was nothing there that addressed this. Searching the fora, I couldn't find anything specific to query speed or HTTP server speed under Linux either. I would not expect a definitive answer. And its not clear that any answer is generally true in all cases. Not clear to me what you are looking for. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Advantages of Linux over XP?
milosz wrote: I'll keep looking. Why? What do you expect to find? Why does it matter? Which ever is faster is only going to be somewhat faster. Since Linux is free, it doesn't cost anything but time to try it and see if you think its faster. What the rest of the world things is irrelevant. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Which Linux should I chose to run Squeezecenter?
sxr71 wrote: I think I'm going to run to the 24hour drug store to buy myself some blank CDs. I've been going crazy trying to find a way to run the whole thing in RAM. I have plenty of RAM and I'd like to at least run Squeezecenter in RAM. On my WHS it made it fly. Is there a way to do this with Vortexbox? You want it to boot from RAM? or just run/execute from RAM? I think its trivial to do with nearly any OS, just have more RAM than the programs need, and voila, virtual memory will have it all in RAM. Usually, such things are not needed, all you need is the current working set. For example SC has MySql, but you don't need a lot of the command parsing stuff to actually be in RAM when you run. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Center 7.3.3 on Mandriva 2007.1
ncarver wrote: I assume that Pat means that certain packages didn't get *installed* by default with whatever path he took through the installer. Yes, exactly. And YMMV, etc. For a year or two, I did use MCC to install the developer tools, and all was fine. (I loved MCC, it was such an improvement from the RedHat offering at that time). I'm no expert on the current state of Mandriva, but I'd guess that 2007.1 is not their latest and greatest. Over time, all equivalent things (RDBMS, distros, etc.) tend to catch up, there really is no such thing as a best in these areas. Plus, I'm running the beta SC, which is currently Version: 7.4 - r27258 So my ability to help directly is not all that great. Hope I haven't distracted too many folks pat -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Center 7.3.3 on Mandriva 2007.1
vbcoen wrote: This one, has me, just no idea how to proceed. Pls help: I used Mandriva for my SqueezeCenter for years, but stopped because the Mandriva folks made it hard. My memory is fuzzy, but they don't include a lot of the critical development tools by default. I ended up moving to Debian, and I really like it for a server. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] SVN question
gharris999 wrote: OK, it’s time for me to start getting serious about using svn to manage my code projects and get ready to push them up to google code. For those of you who are Linux old hands, where do you store your projects? /usr/src? /home/username/projects? I'm not sure I understand your question. I can easily think of two places that store projects. My setup is like this; I have a server with Apache and dav_svn that I can access from anywhere in the world. SVN is configured there. The svn repositories are off in /var/svnhome/ For working, I have a sandbox. ~pfarrell/sandbox So when I'm working on the foo project, its in /home/pfarrell/sandbox/foo -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Which Linux should I chose to run Squeezecenter?
Ian_F wrote: With the latest release of Ubuntu (9.04 Jaunty) you can now specify the partition size for the OS (rather than using the whole drive as previous versions used to) which means you can keep everything on the one drive (OS and data) and still reformat the OS partition later without losing your data. thanks, didn't know that. Same idea, different implementation. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Which Linux should I chose to run Squeezecenter?
Osamede wrote: You sure you want LTS? As far as I know LTS version means the most stable version with the most users and support. Or is that not true. I'd use a different definition. LTS means that it will be supported and patched for a long time. If you are running ay 8.10, then after a while, probably a year, there will be no more patches. By definition, versions are stable in that there is no more software development made for it after release. Linux distros never (or hardly ever) do feature enhancements is a patch, unlike Windows Service Packs that often include new features. Nearly all of the patches for LTS versions are security fixes. If your SqueezeCenter is internal to your house, they are much less interesting. If your box is public, then yes, you need to keep up with the security patches. As for the Fedora or vortexbox, would that be a bigger community than Ubuntu? I don't know which is bigger. Both Fedora and Ubuntu have very active communities. Since vortxbox is fedora, I'm not sure that the question is important or useful. but I would have to pay for it. So if I use Linux then I want to be using a Linux where finding answers to questions are easy. Or am I missing something? Once you get it up and working, you are really done. I ran my early SlimServer (since renamed to SqueezeCenter) on a old PC with Mandriva that was literally untouched for 16+ months. Never down, never touched. Just worked. My current system, which is Debian, has been nearly as reliable, but I'm doing beta testing of the server code, so I have to mess with it more. The reality is that picking a distro is not all that important. You can change it if you don't like it. And most of what you learn about how to administer it will carry over from one brand to the next. I do strongly recommend that you have two disks in the server, a modest one for the OS and another for your music. That way, you can change the OS disk without touching your music. With 1TB disk under $100, the 200GMB or so disk for the OS can be nearly free. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Which Linux should I chose to run Squeezecenter?
Osamede wrote: I think I will go for Ubuntu desktop 8.04 or Ubuntu Server 8.04, unless I hear anything more. You sure you want LTS? Otherwise, the current version is 9.04 If you do Ubuntu Server, make sure you install the GUI/Desktop. It makes debugging the setup a ton easier. You can always turn it off once you are solid, just change the inittab entry -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Which Linux should I chose to run Squeezecenter?
Osamede wrote: From the research I had done, Ubuntu Server 8.04 seemed like a good one. But are there better options out there, whether Ubuntu 9.04 or other Linux distros? The Ubuntu server is not significantly different from the Ubuntu Desktop, except it defaults to not supporting GUI/X-windows. I always recommend installing the GUI to make debugging the setup easier, the amount of disk space difference is irrelevant, especially on a box that will have thousands of CDs worth of music. You can always turn off the GUI once you have it all working perfectly. But if you check the forum archives, you will see that this is a FAQ, frequently asked question and its also frequently answered. So while I should tell you to just search the forum for the answer, here is the real, and only important answer: Run what your buddy uses. The buddy you can buy a beer for in exchange for help getting started. It makes no difference, zero, what your buddy uses, anything will work. Just do what your buddy does, and buy him/her a beer. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Ubuntu 9.04?
Diana Artemis wrote: pablolie wrote: for what it's worth, the 9.04 upgrade destroyed my Ubuntu install... Its bad form to install any new version the first weeks. I always wait a month or more. Install 8.04 Hardy Heron, the Long Term Release? If you want stability, the LTS is the proper way to go. Or go for the real. Install pure Debian. For a server, its functionally the same. But a lot more stable, since Debian changes less frequently. Anyone who is used to Ubuntu will feel right at home, its got Synaptic for updates, etc. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Ubuntu 9.04?
Klaas wrote: su - $USER -c $MUSICHOMEMusicMagicServer start/dev/null Is the su causing problems in the startup? Are you sure its just 'su' and not 'sudo'? Most Ubuntu scripts use the sudo form. Fire up a shell and enter just 'su', I expect you will get a command not found error Its silly to use sudo in an init.d script, since they are all run root by default. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Ubuntu 9.04?
peterbell wrote: Has anyone tried upgrading their SC server to Ubuntu 9.04 yet? I don't really want to be the first to try it! I never get Ubuntu or Debian the first weeks of a release. Let someone else be the pioneer and get arrows. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Squeezecenter for Debian PPC
daviseh wrote: Since you can't add the slimdevices ppc deb builds to etc/apt/sources list, I don't have a PPC, but are you sure? is there an easy way to update Squeezecenter? I don't want to remove and reinstall for fear of having to start all over again. Download the .deb file root shell dpkg -i foo.deb -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Squeezecenter for Debian PPC
daviseh wrote: After searching threads I found that you have to DL the deb package for the PPC and do a manual install. It is not available by apt-get update. Well, all that apt-get really does is automate the download and install process by calling 'dpkg' dpkg -i foo.deb I assume that foo is the name of the deb package. Does the dpkg -i overwrite the existing installation while retaining all of the settings, etc? Correct. if you have foo.deb, then dpkg -i foo.deb if you have baz.deb, then dpkg -i baz.deb I'm not 100% sure that its always safe, but most of the time, it just does the update you want. The documentation (man dpkg) says it does the update. As always, when changing software, its good to have backups. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Problems setting up SqueezeCenter on Debian Linux HP Thin Client
davidrhodes wrote: Now this is strange, 192.168.1.66:9000 in the browser just hangs whilst 192.168.1.66:9000/classic/ also hangs but does display the title, SqueezeCenter, of the page. Viewing the source shows the frameset HTML but the frames aren't rendering? Most strange. I've been running my SC on Debian (Etch) for years. It works perfectly. Have you tried running the browser (Iceweasel) on the host itself, and verify that http://localhost:9000/ works? -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Problems setting up SqueezeCenter on Debian Linux HP Thin Client
signor_rossi wrote: But I think apache or any other extra web server is not needed for SC to run and may even cause problems, because SC has it's own I presume to serve the web interface pages. Apache is not needed on an SC server. It doesn't cause problems, as long as you let the SC use the default ports. If you change them, you have to avoid conflicting with Apache's use of 80 and 443. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Problems setting up SqueezeCenter on Debian Linux HP Thin Client
davidrhodes wrote: Nope, not tried that, won't I need a GUI on my linux to do that? I tried changing the ports in SC admin but no luck, I don't think it let me change it to 80 Oh yes, you need a gui. I always install the desktop options when I install a Debian server. I rarely use it, but its wonderful for debugging setup stuff. While not having X-windows installed saves a tiny bit of disk space, since disks are free, and folks using SqueezeCenter tend to have a gig or more of music, the difference is not noticable. Once I get it all setup and working, I just change the init level and X is not started, so it has zero impact on performance. I never worried about changing to try to use 80. I'm sure it can be done, after all, its open source. But I never bother. The GUI is also nice for setting up firewalls, the syntax of iptables is at best baroque. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Problems setting up SqueezeCenter on Debian Linux HP Thin Client
davidrhodes wrote: I tried installing the GUI at first but ran out of disk space, only got 2Gb on the thin client. Do you know the command line to see how much disk space is in use by any chance? df tells what is free. du tells what is being used if you cd down, du will tell you how much is used from that directory down -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] squeezecenter-repo is not signed?
madko wrote: The newly updated squeezecenter-repo-1.5.rpm for the yum repository is not signed anymore, is that normal? Because for previous versions we were used to have gpg signed rpm, how to be sure that this packages is really from slimdevices if it's not signed? Not sure about your specifics, I use Debian, but yes, the update packaged are not signed. You can download them directly from www.slimdevices.com, and its not painful or slow. There may be a request for enhancement out in bugzilla, if so, vote for it. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Squeezecenter on Linux with multiple NIC's
Slim wrote: question: I have Squeezecenter 7.3.2 running on Debian box with two NICs Look in your server.perf for the line: bindAddress: 127.0.0.1 change to suit. Its usually in /var/lib/squeezecenter/prefs/ -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] SC won't scan library
cybervision_ wrote: the interface on ubuntu with SC, but it just won't scan my library and find the files I've put there. It says Scan Complete 00:00:00. The folder holding the music is put under the folder with my user name. Did you tell SqueezeCenter which folders has your music? -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Which Linux-dist. and how to...?
cybervision_ wrote: Is Ubuntu a good choice? Yes. You may also want to consider VortexBox Ubuntu desktop OR server edtition? For 99% of the time, desktop with full GUI is the right choice. ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Which Linux-dist. and how to...?
cybervision_ wrote: I don't have a wifi-router, but I do have a Wifi-card on its way. It will do the job, no? I don't know. But I do know that for $60 or so, you can get a Linksys WRT54GL (note the final ELL) and it will work great. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Which Linux-dist. and how to...?
cybervision_ wrote: I don't know. But I do know that for $60 or so, you can get a Linksys WRT54GL (note the final ELL) and it will work great. But my problem is that my internet is coming from another router and none of the routers I know of can connect to another to get internet from it as well as connecting to the transporter so it really doesn't help me much. Sure it does. With the WRT54GL, and either DD-WRT or Tomato, you can turn it into an access point. (most commercial access points cost $150 or so). Plug the WRT into your hub/switch, or directly into your DSL/Cable/Fios modem, and plug your server into the WRT. Use the WiFi to talk to your Boom, Transporter, Duet, etc. I do exactly this. Works great. While the ISPs love to make you think that their supplied modem/router is the only solution, there are many other and often better approaches. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
Re: [SlimDevices: Unix] Which Linux-dist. and how to...?
cybervision_ wrote: Well, I just sent back a WRT54G2 because it was impossible to get it to connect with another router, Linksys told me they only had one model that could and the WRT54GL was not it. Linksys does not support using DD-WRT or Tomato, but they make and sell the GL model specifically so you can use DD-WRT or Tomato or other open firmware. With the factory firmware in my WRT54GL, I never could make it be an Access Point, but its trivial with other firmware. So you think using a wifi-card is no-go? I don't know. You'd have to have software in your PC to make it work as an Access Point. I've never tried it. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
