alturismo

Members
  • Content Count

    944
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

108 Very Good

1 Follower

About alturismo

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 06/07/1973

Converted

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Germany

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. nope, all good as long as you dont put extra stuff manually in the /www folder, then you should know what you doing.
  2. that would make a reverse proxy more or less onsolete .... you can skip swag then and just forward ports to your NC instance directly, cert creation will be another story then ... as option, use rewrite rules for all incoming requests to root to your NC domain in swag
  3. port 80 already in use ... you may changed your network settings like to host while unraid already listeining on port 80 as sample, take a look what you done in your swag docker network settings.
  4. @suyac when you say DD Octopus i guess you have a octopus net device (satip), if so, then you dont need the dvb plugin at all cause its a network tuner. you have to search for tuning options inside TVH then. EDIT @ich777 just pointed me to the internal pci octopus, so forget it
  5. current state, cpu usage i could find on the isolated cores are 7300 11 - [kworker/11:1-xfs-conv/nvme1n1p1] 5502 5 - [kworker/5:1H-events_highpri] 8681 2 - [kworker/2:2-wg-crypt-vpn] so the question is, is this normal to see as sample these processes running on isolated cores ?
  6. true, of course my VM's are isolated to these cores too ;) and im pretty sure before (cant remember when) its been like always 0 % usage on the cores which where not assigned to unraid
  7. Hi, may i think wrong, but currently i see low, small usage on isolated cores while they are not in use thats my cpu pinning, so cores 2/10 up should be off while my VM's (which are assigned there) are off now, when they are off i see some small usage all over, 1-3 % now when i try to check what is running on them as sample root@AlsServer:~# CORENUM=2 root@AlsServer:~# ps -e -o pid,psr,cpu,cmd | grep -E "^[[:space:]][[:digit:]]+[[:space:]]+${CORENUM}" 8681 2 - [kworker/2:2-wg-crypt-vpn] root@AlsServer:~# CORE
  8. here how it looks like, as you see chrome in guacamole
  9. then you do something wrong, just tested here and works
  10. no, i say add a port maping in chromium docker and setup with 5900, thats it.
  11. @dfox1787 and as you use(d) firefox browser (i guess djoss one) you should be aware about the 2 different ports, its explained in his template about web front end and vnc direct ...
  12. like described, this wont work, you try now to connect to the webinterface which is used in the chromium docker and not directly vnc. this docker also provides its own web interface for vnc, like guac is ... but guac wont work with this, im pretty sure its listening locally on 5900 (standard vnc port) and if you try to keep inside your proxynet its overall completely wrong. then you should use as host your dockername like "chromium" lower case ONLY and as port 8080 (the local port, not the port provided to your net) ... but as mentioned is NOT the VNC port .
  13. @dfox1787 may show your setup what you did. im pretty sure you are connecting wrong from guac to your chrome docker, in terms you use VNC protocol i guess, you have to point to the native vnc port in the chrome docker and by default this port aint added to the template. by default the bridged port from the template is for the webui and not from vnc, you should add a port forward in the docker like 5900 5900 and no, this has nothing todo with security ... then guac can connect via vnc. sample
  14. @limetech would be really nice if this would be included, would make life alot easier when working with hooks