On 1/31/2014 2:09 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> d) They*do* need to be on the network, so we can back up the pictures and
> videos to a server. That means they*must* be up to date on security.
the Aircams are network devices. they use https and rtsp or whatever it
is.the PC/server running
Hi,
I'm currently looking into the VMAC options that Keepalived had to
offer. This all looks very nice, but now I heard that the VMAC driver in
the linux kernel is not really stable if you are not on a 3.2 kernel or
later. Can anyone here tell me some more about this? Is this really
true? Should I
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 4:30 PM, wrote:
>
>> The price is still right for CentOS 5.x... Why not reinstall and
>> ignore it for another 3 years? Even if RH backports the breakage to
>> the older driver you could probably keep using an older module.
>
> We're trying to get rid of all 5.x ser
Warren Young wrote:
> On 1/31/2014 15:06, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>> That's not going to happen. The budget won't allow that much for this
>> item.
>
> So find the person who chose that arbitrary number, and explain to them
> that in their ignorance, they chose a number that has no connection with
On 1/31/2014 15:06, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> That's not going to happen. The budget won't allow that much for this
> item.
So find the person who chose that arbitrary number, and explain to them
that in their ignorance, they chose a number that has no connection with
reality. Ask them -- now t
Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 4:04 PM, wrote:
>
> Are you saying it worked right in 5.x? If that's the case, why not
> wait until 2017 for something else?
Because it has to work, perfectly, right now and every day,
24x7x365.25. Turning it down is not an
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 4:04 PM, wrote:
Are you saying it worked right in 5.x? If that's the case, why not
wait until 2017 for something else?
>>>
>>> Because it has to work, perfectly, right now and every day, 24x7x365.25.
>>> Turning it down is not an option.
>>
>> Did it do tha
John R Pierce wrote:
> On 1/31/2014 11:55 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>> Hmmm... that $99 each camera gets expensive, fast.
>
> did I mention these are HD (1280x720) cams with decent low light
> sensitivity (but not IR nightvision)? I didn't find any decent
> quality weatherproof PoE cameras wi
Warren Young wrote:
> On 1/31/2014 12:55, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>>
>> Hmmm... that $99 each camera gets expensive, fast.
>
> Have you considered that part of the reason you're having hardware
> problems is that you're using $19 cameras, and expecting professional
> results from them?
>
> $99 for
Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 1:31 PM, wrote:
>>
>>> Are you saying it worked right in 5.x? If that's the case, why not
>>> wait until 2017 for something else?
>>
>> Because it has to work, perfectly, right now and every day, 24x7x365.25.
>> Turning it down is not an option.
>
>
On 1/31/2014 11:55 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Hmmm... that $99 each camera gets expensive, fast.
did I mention these are HD (1280x720) cams with decent low light
sensitivity (but not IR nightvision)? I didn't find any decent
quality weatherproof PoE cameras with mounting hardware for much
On 1/31/2014 12:55, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>
> Hmmm... that $99 each camera gets expensive, fast.
Have you considered that part of the reason you're having hardware
problems is that you're using $19 cameras, and expecting professional
results from them?
$99 for a networked PoE camera is *cheap
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 1:31 PM, wrote:
>
>> Are you saying it worked right in 5.x? If that's the case, why not
>> wait until 2017 for something else?
>
> Because it has to work, perfectly, right now and every day, 24x7x365.25.
> Turning it down is not an option.
Did it do that under 5.x, or di
John R Pierce wrote:
> On 1/31/2014 7:52 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>> With the continuing annoyance from motion, my manager's asked me to go
>> looking again for a video surveillance appliance: basically, a
>> motion-detecting DVR and cameras. The big thing, of course, is a) price
>> (this is a U
On 1/31/2014 7:52 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> With the continuing annoyance from motion, my manager's asked me to go
> looking again for a video surveillance appliance: basically, a
> motion-detecting DVR and cameras. The big thing, of course, is a) price
> (this is a US federal gov't agency, and
Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 12:50 PM, wrote:
>>
>> c) The software bugs keep coming: I had trouble last year, when we went
>> to 6.x,
>
> Are you saying it worked right in 5.x? If that's the case, why not
> wait until 2017 for something else?
Because it has to work, perfectly,
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 12:50 PM, wrote:
> ...but my manage says he'd like to
> get out of the business of making video surveillance work, when there's
> off-the-shelf stuff out there.
Sounds like a classic problem where you have three requirements...
1. "Just works" / off-the-shelf, no man
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 12:45 PM, wrote:
> Mostly likely it *will*. I think we expect to get a surveillance appliance
> - a DVR with firmware, and cameras as part of the package. The ancient USB
> cheapie webcams will go.
I see, so you're looking at a complete package that includes
everything.
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 12:50 PM, wrote:
>
> c) The software bugs keep coming: I had trouble last year, when we went to
> 6.x,
Are you saying it worked right in 5.x? If that's the case, why not
wait until 2017 for something else?
> I hear a couple years ago, $10? $19.99?, but my manage says he
Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 11:00 AM, wrote:
>> >
>> I think you misunderstood me. I'm not looking for IP cameras - we'll be
>> getting cameras that plug into a surveillance DVR appliance. It's the
>> ->DVR's<- firmware software will do the recording and picture taking.
>> What
Matt Garman wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 11:00 AM, wrote:
>> I think you misunderstood me. I'm not looking for IP cameras - we'll be
>> getting cameras that plug into a surveillance DVR appliance. It's the
>> ->DVR's<- firmware software will do the recording and picture taking.
>> What we nee
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 11:00 AM, wrote:
> >
> I think you misunderstood me. I'm not looking for IP cameras - we'll be
> getting cameras that plug into a surveillance DVR appliance. It's the
> ->DVR's<- firmware software will do the recording and picture taking. What
> we need is to be able to d/
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 11:00 AM, wrote:
> I think you misunderstood me. I'm not looking for IP cameras - we'll be
> getting cameras that plug into a surveillance DVR appliance. It's the
> ->DVR's<- firmware software will do the recording and picture taking. What
> we need is to be able to d/l *f
Matt Garman wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 9:52 AM, wrote:
>> With the continuing annoyance from motion, my manager's asked me to go
>> looking again for a video surveillance appliance: basically, a
>> motion-detecting DVR and cameras. The big thing, of course, is a) price
>> (this is a US fede
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 9:52 AM, wrote:
> With the continuing annoyance from motion, my manager's asked me to go
> looking again for a video surveillance appliance: basically, a
> motion-detecting DVR and cameras. The big thing, of course, is a) price
> (this is a US federal gov't agency, and bei
With the continuing annoyance from motion, my manager's asked me to go
looking again for a video surveillance appliance: basically, a
motion-detecting DVR and cameras. The big thing, of course, is a) price
(this is a US federal gov't agency, and being civilian, money is *tight*,
don't give me the l
From: Patrick Begou
> I've tried to use texlive-2013-0.1.20130608_r30832.fc19.src.rpm but I
> can't build it! I fall in a sort of circular dependancy:
Maybe read this conversation:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2013-July/184862.html
Good luck!
JD
___
I've tried to use texlive-2013-0.1.20130608_r30832.fc19.src.rpm but I can't
build it! I fall in a sort of circular dependancy:
rpmbuild --clean --rebuild ./texlive-2013-0.1.20130608_r30832.fc19.src.rpm
error: Failed build dependencies:
harfbuzz-devel is needed by texlive-3:2013-0.1.20130608_
Hi Jeffrey,
this PowerEdge has a replica of the data on another server.
Do you believe it is a hardware problem and not software?
What makes you think that?
Thanks
Il 30/01/2014 16:36, Jeffrey Hass ha scritto:
> Allesio,
>
> Are these VM's -- did you move the /VM files/ respectively to backup
On 1/30/2014 11:57 PM, Todor Petkov wrote:
> what kind of LDAP server (389-DS, OpenLDAP)? Few months ago I tried to
> configure Samba to authenticate against 389-DS. I found out, that Samba
> does not read the 'password' value, but 'sambaNTPassword'.
its certainly true that Windows passwords are h
30 matches
Mail list logo
