ZM-1.20.0 Fedoa Core 3 RPM

Support and queries relating to all previous versions of ZoneMinder
SyRenity
Posts: 301
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 2:43 pm

Post by SyRenity »

Hello Corder.

Does this directory ftp://cordel.no-ip.info/pub/Fedora/Core/3/i386/testing/, is the one that contain the ZM recompiled with the latest FFMPEG CVS?
Dr. Strangelove
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:43 pm

Remote camera?

Post by Dr. Strangelove »

Hi,

I installed the latest zm rpm on a system with FC3, SeLinux disabled and a DLink DCS-900 camera.

I can see images from the camera with FireFox at 192.168.0.20/image.jpg. When I put this in zm and set the other parameters accordingly, all I get is a broken link icon when I try to view the monitor.

Any ideas?

Thanks,
Doc
SyRenity
Posts: 301
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 2:43 pm

Post by SyRenity »

Hello Dr. Strangelove.

Try to use the following path - 192.168.0.20/video.cgi - that way it might work, and you will get more then 1 FPS. I have a similar setup with DCS-900 - works very sweet.
Dr. Strangelove
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:43 pm

Post by Dr. Strangelove »

Hi,

Still no images, but I noticed something strange.

Earlier, if I clicked on the "Options" link, I would get a page with several tabs across the top. The only tab that seemed to do anything was "Users" which printed a list of the users. Now, there are many settings displayed for each of the tabs. And the user name(s) are liniks which bring up settings for that user. It didn't do this last night.

Similarly if I clicked the name of my "Monitor" to look at images/streams, there was NOT a link near the top that toggled between "Stills" and "Stream". Now, this link suddenly started appearing.

Seems like the code is crashing and only displaying part of the pages. But each time I run it, it seems like new settings/links appear...Strange...
Dr. Strangelove
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:43 pm

Post by Dr. Strangelove »

Finally...Started finding where the errors are logged (might be a good FAQ). Found a slew of shmget errors. Found zmc crashing as soon as it was started.

Had 384 megs ram. Dug up another stick of ram, and viola, it runs...

Thanks for zm and the rpm...
User avatar
zoneminder
Site Admin
Posts: 5215
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2003 2:07 pm
Location: Bristol, UK
Contact:

Post by zoneminder »

Good, I hope it's plain sailing for you from here on in!

Phil
Dr. Strangelove
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:43 pm

Post by Dr. Strangelove »

Hi,

Thanks, it seems to be running great. Even got some motion detected/recorded last night. This is a nice package. I might even have to make a donation :)

BTW, for the record, 500 MHz Athlon, remote cam, fc3. 384 MB ram would NOT even run the cam at 320x240 with minimum buffering. But zm does run with 448 MB (256+128+64). Perhaps a list of minimum configurations in the FAQ might be useful. It might have saved me a couple days anyway.
User avatar
zoneminder
Site Admin
Posts: 5215
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2003 2:07 pm
Location: Bristol, UK
Contact:

Post by zoneminder »

ZM should run perfectly fine in 384Mb of memory so long as you don't have masses of cameras, massive images or huge buffers, none of which seem to apply to you. What wasn't working before? Were you getting shared memory errors? These are usually just because the configured limit is too small rather than the amount of real memory.

Phil
Dr. Strangelove
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:43 pm

Post by Dr. Strangelove »

I was getting shared memory errors (shmget) until I changed the buffering to very low values (can't say without looking) and configuration (was at something like 22 megs per application?). Then the shmget errors ceased but zmc still crashed every time it was started (exit code 21?). No stills, no video. But when I added an old stick of 64 MB to bring it up to 448 MB, it all suddenly started working. I haven't tried increasing the buffers yet.

I tried 320x240x24(?) bit color and it wouldn't run either until I added the memory. I'm now using 640x480x24.
User avatar
zoneminder
Site Admin
Posts: 5215
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2003 2:07 pm
Location: Bristol, UK
Contact:

Post by zoneminder »

That's very strange as 640x480 will use four times the memory of 320x240 and you haven't quadrupled it!

Phil
Locked