Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[ogs]

It's a 32-bit x86 Debian program for now. 

Can I run this without a GUI?

[imugli]

Can I run this without a GUI?

That's what half of us are wondering 

I suppose we'll find out soon enough.

[Matt]

Can I run this without a GUI?

You can run it in a no GUI mode, just like MC on Windows or Mac, but it requires X11 since the main thread is event driven (using X11 events).

[imugli]

So this means it won't run on a completely headless server? at least not one without x11 (which is most headless servers as it's unnecessary)? Not ideal IMO.

[ogs]

You can run it in a no GUI mode, just like MC on Windows or Mac, but it requires X11 since the main thread is event driven (using X11 events).

Right.. so how do we configure it without GUI?
Is support for convolution in place in the early releases?

[Matt]

Right.. so how do we configure it without GUI?

You don't.  It's not a command line program.  I think you can connect to the X Server from anywhere to use the GUI, but I'm not an expert at this.

Is support for convolution in place in the early releases?

Yes.

[ogs]

You don't.  It's not a command line program.  I think you can connect to the X Server from anywhere to use the GUI, but I'm not an expert at this.

I'll have to agree with imugli above: use of X is not ideal. This brings us right back to the server discussion. I would like to have a "Connect to..." in my Windows MC so I can administer MC server on a Linux machine from there.
I will likely test anyway as convolution is very important in my system. Must get X up and running first though

[JimH]

I don't think using XWindow means that a monitor would be required.  In fact, X was originally used to put a computer's display on another machine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Window_System

[MrC]

The beauty of X Windows is the separation between where the program runs and where the display is presented.  So, you can run an X Windows program on your headless server, but have the display appear on any desktop station (that is running an X Windows server).

[kstuart]

I wrote what - to my knowledge - were the first scroll bars in X Windows (and thereby for Unix).  I haven't used X Windows since those times, and don't remember much about it now, lol.

[ogs]

I don't think using XWindow means that a monitor would be required.  In fact, X was originally used to put a computer's display on another machine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Window_System

I know XWindows quite well. Problem is I do not have X installed on any of my Linux machines. They are all headless. I am not even sure it is possible to get X to run om my NAS boxes. We'll see..

[imugli]

I know XWindows quite well. Problem is I do not have X installed on any of my Linux machines. They are all headless. I am not even sure it is possible to get X to run om my NAS boxes. We'll see..

This. Most headless servers don't have x installed because it simply takes up space in most circumstances. Most that run headless servers of the Linux variety administer them remotely via command line or using webmin or similar.

I run both Ubuntu desktop and server at home, so the GUI version is . But I was hoping for a truly headless, no need for x, administer remotely, set and forget Linux server.

I'm not AGAINST installing x, its just a waste of space...

[JimH]

This. Most headless servers don't have x installed because it simply takes up space in most circumstances. Most that run headless servers of the Linux variety administer them remotely via command line or using webmin or similar.

I run both Ubuntu desktop and server at home, so the GUI version is . But I was hoping for a truly headless, no need for x, administer remotely, set and forget Linux server.

I'm not AGAINST installing x, its just a waste of space...

Space is cheap.

We need X11 for event handling.

I don't think we've promised that it would run on a NAS.  It would be nice, and we'll do a little work to see if we can make it happen, but making our own event handling would take more than a little work.

[gvanbrunt]

Lets keep in mind that this is v1 of porting the software over to the Linux platform. This is a huge undertaking to say the least. It's a little early to be complaining about the feature set, size, libraries required etc. Lets just getting it working first before asking for changes.

[hoyt]

Space is cheap.

We need X11 for event handling.

I don't think we've promised that it would run on a NAS.  It would be nice, and we'll do a little work to see if we can make it happen, but making our own event handling would take more than a little work.

While not a promise... it was the second bullet point in your first thread titled Linux:

http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=82440.0

Unless this runs on a headless (non-X based) Linux install, it is of 0 use to me.  My expectation for a Linux based version of MC was that I could run it as the library server on one of my NAS boxes and eventually connect to it with a Windows or Mac version of MC to run the HTPC.  And what you're saying now is that's not possible, you'd have to stand up a full Linux install, with display, to run MC on Linux?  And it'll be audio only for v1, like the Mac one, and to get video (actually making it a replacement for my HTPC), I'll have to pay for another upgrade?  Am I misinterpreting this? 

I'm a little miffed today from the email telling me that I can pay to upgrade the Mac version, 4 months after it went stable.  And now see a note that the Linux version is basically only to run on a Linux desktop install. 

--Ryan

[ths61]

Can we request that it runs in Linux run level 3 (Multi-user Text Mode with Networking) as well as 5 (3 + GUI)?

Run level 3 does not start the graphics/windowing system.

BTW, just bought the early-bird special in anticipation of run level 3 support (especially for Audio Only).

[MrC]

I think you folks are asking for a different product.  Media Center is a graphical, media management and playback program.

You're asking for a media server-only product.

[ths61]

... You're asking for a media server-only product.

Nope, just asking for it to optionally run the core services without a GUI.  

This would be analogous to how J River MC is currently being run on MS Server 2012 in Core mode (no GUI, no Graphics, just console mode and network connectivity for remote control).

[MrC]

Rome wasn't built in a day.

[hoyt]

Rome wasn't built in a day.

I don't want it to be built in a day, but I want the foundation to be designed in a way that reflects what actually made me excited to hear that MC was making a Linux version.

[ths61]

I don't want it to be built in a day, but I want the foundation to be designed in a way that reflects what actually made me excited to hear that MC was making a Linux version.

+1

This is a base architecture decision issue and should be planned for accordingly.

[BartMan01]

A roadmap item suggestion:

Right now you have MC and MC Library Server.  What would be ideal would be to have the library server and library itself sitting on the NAS.  Then from the desktop you could connect to, play back from, and/or maintain that library.

[MrC]

The code is already designed - I think Matt mentioned some time ago, there is over 1,000,000 lines of code in MC.  They've been working on the code refactoring for nearly 2 years now, eliminating Microsoft code so that MC can be ported to other platforms.  It is a very, very large project.

It would be catastrophic for JRiver to re-design, add features, and port all at the same time.  So you should subdue your expectations appropriately.

[JimH]

Sometime in the next few weeks, you'll be able to judge for yourself whether what we're doing is suitable.  Please be patient.

[JimH]

It's more than 1,500,000 lines of code.

The good news is that it is entirely free of Microsoft's code now.  It was a huge project to do that in order to port to Mac.  It's still a big job to port to Linux, but not so big as the Mac port.

[ths61]

Sometime in the next few weeks, you'll be able to judge for yourself whether what we're doing is suitable.  Please be patient.

JimH,

What distro/version of Linux should we install/configure in anticipation for the initial release?  

Most of my current installs are Fedora Core and proprietary embedded versions.

TIA

[JimH]

So far, we've been working on Debian.

[ths61]

So far, we've been working on Debian.

Thanks, I am pulling down Debian 32bit, version 7 now to give it a go.

Update: Debian 7 install went fine, up and running.

[leezer3]

I think the first thing that several people of the people in this thread are confusing is the XServer itself with the multitude of window managers available.
Running X on it's own takes up virtually no resources and you absolutely don't need a graphics card, mouse etc. with the right xorg.conf settings

There is absolutely nothing wrong with running an XServer on a headless box for that matter. I don't buy the resources argument either- With a custom rolled copy of mainline, I can quite happily run X & a desktop environment etc. on my spare 486 box with 16mb of RAM.

If MC is built correctly and sensibly, there is no reason it shouldn't run on most flavours of Linux with very minimal tweaking.
I'd be more concerned if they'd decided to make the primary dev platform Ubuntu unstable or something, rather than Debian.
Personal choice would be a RPM based distro (Was Mandrake for many years before they went down the pan), but Debian is one of the safest bets in terms of long term survival and relative lack of quirks.

-Leezer-

[pantapei]

I have a dream...jriver come daemon...
 

[Screwbottle]

It's more than 1,500,000 lines of code.

The good news is that it is entirely free of Microsoft's code now.  It was a huge project to do that in order to port to Mac.  It's still a big job to port to Linux, but not so big as the Mac port.

Hear! Hear! and to MrC's and the other team respondees posts. I am happy at this point that we have MC for Linux, and like the Windows version, it will grow from strength to strength. This is simply to say well done to all involved in the Linux MC project, and some praise, instead of bombarding requests for features already.

To the others posted here asking for headless media servers, how many other FOSS or OSS media servers are available for Linux, then use them in the meantime while MC finds it's feet. Some customers will be lost, while many will be gained. And I also concur and agree, X server is not the GUI in itself which is the desktop most know of, be it GNOME, KDE, Cinnamon, Unity or the myriad of them out there. As per the definition by LINFO (The Linux Information Project) X Server is and I quote "a complete, cross-platform and free client-server system for managing GUIs (graphical user interfaces) on single computers and on networks of computers" unquote, and correctly stated by leezer3, is a very thin client. For further reading to those questioning the X Server you can read in completeness here http://www.linfo.org/x_server.html.

I perrsonally am noticing a nice migration to Linux, as Windows is not offering what many were expecting out of it, especially from version 8. So what better thing to happen than to see one of our favourite Windows programs taking the plunge and working in Linux.

Thank you very much to the MC team, from myself. I am at least appreciative of your work (+2 years of it)

Regards

[Screwbottle]

Thanks, I am pulling down Debian 32bit, version 7 now to give it a go.

Update: Debian 7 install went fine, up and running.

Hi THS61

Being Debian based you have many choices of distros other than just pure Debian. The most popular as per linux dstro watch http://distrowatch.com/ is Linux Mint, a subset of Ubuntu but without the Ubuntu Unity desktop, and also Ubuntu. Current top three are Mint, Debian and Ubuntu, and all three are very easy to install and use for first timers. You only have to read the info of the distro of choice, at distro watch to see if they are running Debian or not.

Regards

[ogs]

Don't get me wrong. I am very enthusiastic about the Linux port of MC. I've voted 'yes' in the early version poll. The doubt with my (Debian based) NAS boxes has more to do with the age of Linux versions on the NAS and lack of general support. My NAS boxes are placed too far away from my stereo to be connected directly anyway.  I'll install a Debian based distro on my Intel 3217 and take it from there.

[The Computer Audiophile]

It's more than 1,500,000 lines of code

If you use word wrap and shrink your window you could be at 3,000,000 lines of code very quickly.

Only kidding :~)

[ogs]

I have now tried MC on the latest Voyage release. I installed Cygwin on my Windows to get X functionality. With acceptable effort (following good advice on this forum) I could run MC on the Voyage box with display sent to the Cygwin X server on my PC. I've configured MC 18 & 19 multiple times on Windows so know which settings to use. I always control MC with JRemote, but I could not do this on the Linux version so no sound. I also had issues with copy and paste in MC's DSP configuration so I did not get convolution set up. I could have written the full file path to the Audiolense .cfg file, but the file name is very long and with spaces in it so I didn't. Also, MC's windows displayed on my PC were rather sluggish, but this may be a Cygwin thing and not MC's fault.

I am dissapointed that the JRiver config is stored in a binary format. In Linux, config files are normally plain text to make it easy to read end edit. I hope a future version will change this.

I'll wait a bit before I test again, maybe when version is approaching 19.0.100. The good thing is that I know the Linux distro I've chosen works so it is quite easy to try.

Thanks and keep up the good work!

[bob]

..
I am dissapointed that the JRiver config is stored in a binary format. In Linux, config files are normally plain text to make it easy to read end edit. I hope a future version will change this.
..

They aren't really binary,  I think they are utf-32 with (unfortunately) a utf-16 header mark.

[ShirazD]

ubuntu 13.10 -- clicking on the icon doesn't do anything. it seemed to install fine.

i see others saying it's working for them in unity. is there something special that i need to do?

until then, can anyone tell me, is this working as a client for a windows MC server?

thanks...

[MrHaugen]

Really? People almost demand that program to change over night to suite a small part of the community? I'm not saying that running MC on a NAS would not be great, but please face the fact that MC was not build with this in mind from the start. There's a lot of things that needs to be changed for it to work on a NAS. And the application have just been ported to Linux. How realistic is such demands?

In my opinion you would probably get much further by asking for specific improvements, so we can get to that goal eventually. For instance, asking for ways to manage ALL media and meta data managements on the clients would be a start. Cover art and such are not easily edited on Library server clients today. It would probably be needed to be addressed at one time or another if we want to remove the need for a GUI on the server.

[bob]

ubuntu 13.10 -- clicking on the icon doesn't do anything. it seemed to install fine.

i see others saying it's working for them in unity. is there something special that i need to do?

until then, can anyone tell me, is this working as a client for a windows MC server?

thanks...

I'd guess you are missing the fixed fonts.
Install xfonts-75dpi and xfonts-100dpi and try again.
You could always open a terminal and type in mediacenter19 and see what it does.

[ogs]

They aren't really binary,  I think they are utf-32 with (unfortunately) a utf-16 header mark.

Bob, thanks for changing this in .72