[mythtv-users] modernizing mythtv

[jedi]

On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 06:58:06PM +0200, Hika van den Hoven wrote:
> Hoi Saul,
> 
> Saturday, May 10, 2014, 6:50:37 PM, you wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 10 May 2014 17:56:42 +0200
> > Hika van den Hoven <hikavdh at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> >> To come back to a more fundamental issue. No server/backend
> >> application should depend on a graphical environment other then WEB.
> >> Running X for those is a wast of resources. That is one of the main
> >> reasons I find Windows unsuited for server applications. On my server
> >> running mythbackend among others I have only the most basic graphical
> >> card present, so I can if needed watch the boot process and implement
> >> new kernels. The only reason X is even installed is Mythsetup, which I
> >> only start at need. The rest I manage by ssh or more and more the web.
> >> Originally a lot of people were running both back and frontend on the
> >> same machine, but nowadays more and more people are splitting this up.
> >> So I see mythsetup as an archaic inheritance of old times, that
> >> should be replaced by a more modern web interface.
> 
> > I have completely headless BE, I upgrade the kernels and run setup
> > remotely no problem. No X installed.
> 
> You're sure you don't have a 'hidden' X-server running on your
> backend to facilitate? Anyway a X application will use more bandwidth

    That's not the way that X works.

> on the network, since it is not optimised that way.

    So? As long as it works, what do you care really?

> If not, can you quote the commands you use to start mythsetup
> remotely. I'm interested.

    ssh -X eddie	
    mythsetup

[deletia]

    Back in the old days before Linux and ssh, I would have to set
the DISPLAY variable manually when doing this sort of thing but it 
was still the same easy peasy simple stuff.