black easter eggs

pbisiac · Post by **pbisiac** » Fri Apr 08, 2005 7:41 am

mine the quantity of cholesterol in each lipoprotein class (for example, comfortable in a sports bra. Layers night's rest. The material should be 100-percent organic and all
When we were going to Roz Tims thon, we booked The Grosvenor Pullford Hotel near Chester They couldn't have made us feel more welcome with our two dogs and we were able to eat in the restaurant
Spicy Corn Chowder with Ham ing much of your free time fixing meals. that mimic estrogen. By acting to remove these and other toxins from the body, it acts as a
half a dozen baked tortilla chips. Like most tomato-based sauces and stews, chili tastes in digestion and assimilation, constituting important dietary fiber, especially water-soluble fiber, is associated with a reduction

thelight · Post by **thelight** » Fri Apr 08, 2005 5:08 pm

I run zoneminder on a headless machine without x-windows running. I found that the overhead of x-windows+web browser put a disproportionate strain on the system compared to zoneminder.

unclerichy · Post by **unclerichy** » Sat Apr 09, 2005 4:38 pm

I run a headless system as well with a Lex SV823A board (same as a Nehemiah M10000+VIA chipset). X has never been anywhere near it

To control it I SSH into it.

I'm not sure why you think X might be involved - the browser interface doesn't actually run on the same machine as ZoneMinder.

dmit · Post by **dmit** » Sat Jul 09, 2005 1:42 pm

One more interesting thing could be done if ZM would work with SDL or directfb:

a standalone ZM box with a simple montage output to the screen or monitor (the same as with analog video recording equipment, when you just see all your cameras on a monitor at once) while the system itself processes all other things like motion detection, recording etc.

Is it possible to do?

krzys31337 · Post by **krzys31337** » Sun Jul 17, 2005 3:00 am

Yep,

But as far as i'm interested in Epia's the X support is "good", you say overhead on using X11 is too big?

Any tests? Try to run configured X11 server, with minimal fonts sets, harware acceleration enabled etc..

thelight · Post by **thelight** » Sun Jul 17, 2005 2:31 pm

I found it too high on my system, it may not be on other peoples. Running zonealarm with 3 camera's and a few monitors has my system running just under flat out so the little extra from X and a web browser was pushing it over.

krzys31337 · Post by **krzys31337** » Sun Jul 17, 2005 2:42 pm

Load is raisen by X11 or by browser ?

Please do some "top" on a ssh console and post results.

If it's the Web Browser, then kill it, run some xclock and look at another thread I've speaking. (in ZM 1.2xxx montage without X11/browser).

Look here:
http://stalkercam.sourceforge.net/

This is not my app but after some litte modifications it could handle images from zms (still jpgs) and my system seems to be very happy with this little replacement for browser...

dmit · Post by **dmit** » Mon Jul 18, 2005 11:32 am

There is another way to improve performance:

1) you can use a kind of alternative X server software, I've heared of several lightweight ones;

2) use RATPOISON window manager instead of Gnome, KDE etc. It also allows extreme programmable key bindings and scriptong to get rid of mouse use at all.

krzys31337 · Post by **krzys31337** » Mon Jul 18, 2005 12:40 pm

Hello,

You are trying to invent a circle again? (it's an old sayin in my country).

Please read what i've posted in http://www.zoneminder.com/forums/viewto ... highlight=

You need no window manager at all !

All that i'm saying here is we should focus on not having browser and mpeg/jpeg/mjpeg encoding/decoding done on "localhost" this is killing machines with ZM.

dmit · Post by **dmit** » Mon Jul 18, 2005 1:41 pm

krzys31337:

Haven't seen the topic you mentioned before, but it looks like YOU are trying to reinvent that wheel. :) The idea/solution explained there is so common that I think many people have already realised that. For me personally it is working that way for a couple of months already, and exactly the same way as you explained in your post. Also some additional improvements / tuning was done.

At Jul 9 I just raised the question of using SDL or FB instead of X server, but it would involve some hard programming to get rid of the web browser software.

Anyway, if we are talking about fine tuning an X installation for a stand alone ZM box with a monitor, then using a cut down X-server and RATPOISON window manager will be much more convenient and better then using just X itself without window manager at all.

Look why:
- you are too much limited in management of your ZM windows on the screen;
- you can not effectively control the ZM application and it's functions;
- Ratpoison is a simple Window Manager with no fat library dependencies, no fancy graphics, no window decorations, and no rodent dependence so it will not hit your system's performance and memory;
- the screen can be split into non-overlapping frames. All windows are kept maximized inside their frames to take full advantage of your precious screen real estate;
- all interaction with the window manager is done through keystrokes, ratpoison has a configurable prefix map to bind all needed functions of ZM to some numeric keys for example.

As a result you can replace the full keyboard with just a small numpad, from which you could choose a specific camera or select a montage view.

I will try to release a slackware based ZM distro which will have all this features included, but I'm limited in time right now, so can not forecast the exact date when it will be available for the public.

Maybe someone could recommend a lighter and faster replacement for the standard X-org server?

krzys31337 · Post by **krzys31337** » Mon Jul 18, 2005 1:55 pm

I don't need no WM

I mean: any WM will do it (currently black box) but it's not needed.
Only thing I would require form WM is "maximize my app" and listen to wmctrl (this is a project on freshmeat.net).

Doing X11/DirectFB app is a good choice. No browser, no extra load.

And keyboard, maybe you have seen USB numeric-only or serial-port keypads ?

dmit · Post by **dmit** » Mon Jul 18, 2005 2:24 pm

I have seen a lot of USB numeric-only or serial-port keypads. :) You can even build your ZoneMinder system as an embedded device with your own casing and a kind of keypad integrated right into it. In fact this is exactly what I am building right now for one local project.

Yes, most of WMs will do the job, Ratpoison is just more lightweight and fast.
The main idea of using such WM is to open required ZM URLs exactly after a specific keypress and at predefined position and size.

krzys31337 · Post by **krzys31337** » Sun Sep 18, 2005 1:11 pm

Hello there !

Has anyone "more than tried" to do local zm-interface without browser (firefox) and some window manager?

If not then maybe I will be doing it. Right now i'm on the very basic feature list:

a) montage with 4 sources "scalled up/down" to fit whole screen
b) reacting to numpad only (PS/2 or USB) programmed keys: zoom for source 1...8, Cycle group A/B.... Montage Group A/B
c) X SDL or FB, I have no idea what is better/faster/cleaner. As of my self I would use plain old "X" but when it's only local display it seems to be very unnatural soultion.
d) i'm only interested in "reading shm" not using even cgi-bin/zms and reacting to system load, if it's mutch more then "2.00" going to sleep (1);

jameswilson · Post by **jameswilson** » Sun Sep 18, 2005 1:14 pm

way ovewr my head but good luck this sound brilliant

James

dmit · Post by **dmit** » Mon Sep 19, 2005 2:13 pm

Good luck from me too! :)

I was thinking a lot about that, but not sure how to achieve it without hard coding the graphics engine from scratch, which would require too much time and effort for me.

BTW, one more idea for building a kind of "embedded" surveillance system with integrated keypad: you could take the LIRC project, and build a kind of a "homebrew" receiver device but WITHOUR IR sensor. Then choose a remote control unit of size and key set you like, embed it into your device and connect it's schematics to your receiver module directly (without IR transmitter). This would require some basic patching to the schematics, but is really a simpliest way of building the keypad interface. :)