More > JRiver Media Center 20 for Linux
Linux requirements
bob:
We don't require a X server or X hardware support on the machine running MC.
We require this:
libX11-6: installed size 1.5 megs
the dependencies for this are:
libX11-data: installed size 1.6 megs
libxcb1: installed size .2 megs
libxau6: installed size .1 megs
libxdmcp6: installed size .1 megs
libext6
libuuid1
libgtk2.0-0
libp11-kit0
libgl1-mesa-glx or libgl1
any compliant browser
xfonts-75dpi (pcf fonts)
libasound2
Total installed X11 size : 4.8 megs
For comparison, the current package size for MC (compressed) is 67 megs.
You should be able to run with this minimal setup. The GUI should run over an ssh connection.
Runlevels are dependent on the distro. Mine is runlevel 2. Traditionally in unix runlevel 3 was GUI but the different distro makers have done this in disparate ways. Ubuntu and Debian don't use runlevels to determine whether or not the GUI is in use.
We don't care about what desktop you are using, MC is not using any desktop code nor is it using GTK or KDE.
I've run it on XFCE and Gnome. It should run on any desktop.
No ideas about NAS's.
Don't have a linux based one that I can log into.
I can tell you that the current requirements are:
X86 (32 bit)
SSE2
see above for libraries
an ALSA hardware device
I'd imagine one could run on other distro's (i.e. centos) by unpacking the deb and putting the contents into the right place IF the requirements listed above are met.
skarsol:
Are you testing/compiling this on FreeBSD at all? A lot of the guys with large media servers (myself included) are running FreeBSD to take advantage of ZFS. Looks like all the required libraries are available on FreeBSD but I'm guessing you wont be providing a source package?
If it's started up over a ssh connection, will it still run once the connection is closed?
Will it blow up if no alsa devices are installed?
Screwbottle:
--- Quote from: bob on September 27, 2013, 04:56:49 pm ---Runlevels are dependent on the distro. Mine is runlevel 2. Traditionally in unix runlevel 3 was GUI but the different distro makers have done this in disparate ways. Ubuntu and Debian don't use runlevels to determine whether or not the GUI is in use.
--- End quote ---
Hi Bob
If I may respond and correct, I think you have your runlevels indicated here incorrect, even if you take the disparity of SOME Unix/Linux distros. The traditional runlevel 2 is multiple users, no NFS (network filesystem) and rarely used. Your indicated runlevel 3 for GUI is also not correct, runlevel 3 is multiple users, command line (i.e., all-text mode) interface and is the standard runlevel for most Linux-based server hardware, no GUI. The runlevel for GUI is runlevel 5 for multiple users, GUI (graphical user interface) and the standard runlevel for most Linux-based desktop systems.
Also incorrect with Debian and Ubuntu, yes they are not 100% compliant with UNIX and Linux standards, but they still use the runlevels, here is a post covering this in more detail for Ubuntu and how editing the lightDM config file resolves this, for those interested. http://askubuntu.com/questions/228402/boot-to-runlevel-3
Regards
JimH:
--- Quote from: skarsol on September 27, 2013, 11:45:19 pm ---Are you testing/compiling this on FreeBSD at all? A lot of the guys with large media servers (myself included) are running FreeBSD to take advantage of ZFS. Looks like all the required libraries are available on FreeBSD but I'm guessing you wont be providing a source package?
--- End quote ---
Not yet.
bob:
--- Quote from: screwbottle on September 28, 2013, 04:38:44 am ---Hi Bob
If I may respond and correct, I think you have your runlevels indicated here incorrect, even if you take the disparity of SOME Unix/Linux distros. The traditional runlevel 2 is multiple users, no NFS (network filesystem) and rarely used. Your indicated runlevel 3 for GUI is also not correct, runlevel 3 is multiple users, command line (i.e., all-text mode) interface and is the standard runlevel for most Linux-based server hardware, no GUI. The runlevel for GUI is runlevel 5 for multiple users, GUI (graphical user interface) and the standard runlevel for most Linux-based desktop systems.
Also incorrect with Debian and Ubuntu, yes they are not 100% compliant with UNIX and Linux standards, but they still use the runlevels, here is a post covering this in more detail for Ubuntu and how editing the lightDM config file resolves this, for those interested. http://askubuntu.com/questions/228402/boot-to-runlevel-3
Regards
--- End quote ---
I shouldn't have said they don't matter at all. Of course 0,1 and 6 are well defined.
I've installed dozens of systems from scratch, though most of them have been upgraded from older versions. Never have seen runlevel 5.
Only have seen runlevel 3 on centos, an old Vanilla SVR4 system and AIX.
Here for example, is my old ubuntu bottle (booting into full GUI w/ Unity):
bob@ubuntu-vbox:~$ cat /etc/issue
Ubuntu 11.10 \n \l
bob@ubuntu-vbox:~$ runlevel
N 2
bob@ubuntu-vbox:~$ uname -a
Linux ubuntu-vbox 3.0.0-19-generic #33-Ubuntu SMP Thu Apr 19 19:05:57 UTC 2012 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
Anyway, that's not the issue. The issue for MC is whether or not a GUI is needed and using runlevel as shorthand for that is not useful IMO.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version