On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 8:26 PM, Brad DerManouelian <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:myth@dermanouelian.com">myth@dermanouelian.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div style="word-wrap: break-word;"><div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c"><div><div>On Jan 8, 2009, at 5:21 PM, <a href="mailto:jarpublic@gmail.com" target="_blank">jarpublic@gmail.com</a> wrote:</div><br><blockquote type="cite">
<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div style="word-wrap: break-word;"><div><div><div> <blockquote type="cite">
I am a little confused now. I was aware of the fact that tunerless backends are unsupported. But in the thread that this one branch from, I thought it was said that running a frontend only system without a backend is also unsupported. So if only FE/BE or BE systems are officially supported and only BE with tuners are supported, then what is a supported FE only machine? Does this actually mean that on a FE only machine we should install BE but we should then take steps post install to make sure the BE doesn't run, because there are no tuners? Or have misunderstood what was said? This seems awfully convoluted to me. <br>
</blockquote><br></div></div></div><div>Sorry, where does it say running a frontend without a backend is unsupported?</div><div><br></div></div><br></blockquote></div><br>Mike said it at the end of the thread about transcoding on frontends: <a href="http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/users/365123#365123" target="_blank">http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/users/365123#365123</a>. He said:<br>
<br><font color="black" face="Verdana,Arial,Helvetica" size="2"><font color="black" face="Verdana,Arial,Helvetica" size="2">"Yeah, just not worth the space, and since the only supported configuration is an installation of both mythfrontend and mythbackend</font></font>"<br>
<br>It didn't sound right to me, so I assumed I was reading it wrong or confused. What does that comment mean?<br></blockquote><br></div></div></div><div>Installing, not running. He said that because frontend shares libraries with backend and no one has a package that cleanly installs one without the other and since the space savings is negligible, there's no incentive to. Supported method is installing both and only running a backend when you have a tuner in the machine. The frontend has no backend requirement other than being able to connect to the master backend properly.</div>
<div><br></div><br></div></blockquote></div><br>I have always just run an ubuntu system. I can just install the frontend and the apt packages pull in the correct libraries. However, if I install the backend with apt then it be setup to run automatically. So I would have to go in and remove stuff /etc/init.d and probably elsewhere. The previous advice made it sound like someone like me should always install the backend on my frontends or I am likely to have problems. However, installing a backend that won't be used and then trying to remove stuff that the package installer did seems more likely to break my system. Thanks for the clarification. I just didn't want to be running a config that wasn't supported by the devs, but it seems like using the proper meta-packages with apt will get things done correctly for me. I will leave it alone.<br>