View Full Version : Another lesson

12-20-2006, 04:22 PM
I have a couple of G4s that run SecuritySpy


and at this point 8 cameras. Our historical downtown neighborhood is "improving," but oh so slowly.

One G4 is devoted to running the cameras and storing captured QT files on a West. Dig. 400GB drive and the other, via the server feature on SecuritySpy, was set up to provide an instant look at all of the cameras at whatever location along the LAN setup one cares to plug into or through a wireless access point. All of this basically worked with minor set-up, and manually setting the IP of the "server" so that DHCP would not interfere. The video is streamed through port 8000 by default. One can log-on with almost any browser with the right IP and port number, or set up another SecuritySpy program to receive the video through the network.

This last week-end we got the notion to switch G4's because the one that was the "client' had a faster processor and since we were going to adding additional cameras soon, we felt this was an appropriate adjustment. Both are Giga bumped DAs, 1.3 and 2.0. The 1.3 can handle 8 (it has been for the last couple of years, 24/7), but you can tell there is a load. Other than one having a faster processor the G4's are identical.

It had been several months since updating and the disk was fairly full of "captured" files - none of which were particularly useful at that point. It was running 10.4.5. I decided to just zero the disk and re-install the system in the "new" DA, updateing the device drivers and OS X too. Video is input through two Quad splitters fed into an AlchemyTV card and a Firewire converter that uses an OS X driver. All of these items had updates that had not been installed.

Then came the point at which I should have known better. To save time, I installed the system, OS X updates, updated programs and device drivers all in the same session on both machines. Hooked up the server machine to the Quads and booted up. SecuritySpy appeared to run and function normally on the faster G4. The required adjustments to the program were made, camera settings, server start-up, etc. The LAN set-up was not changed. The client (now a Giga 1.3) had also been updated but under no circumstances could I get an image from the sever. No computer on the LAN could receive and image (there are three others, including a wireless notebook (PC). The PC would just open a blank window and set there going duhhhh. All of the macs would give the this message:

Safari can't open the page "". The Error was: "lost network connection" (NSURLErrorDomain:-1005) Please choose Report Bug to Apple from the Safari menu, note the error number, and descrie what you did before you saw this message.

After determining that it was not misconnected, I was sitting there with a pile of possibilities, including that I zapped something with static elec. in the change-over. Googled that error and didn't find anything that gave me a clue about what to do except to trash preferences, which didn't work.

After all the dead-end roads, back alleys that lead nowhere, over the past few days, some of which were entertained with the peen-headed assumption that Apple would not screw up port access, I finally blanked the disk installed 10.4, the programs, the original drivers for the devices and - hey, it worked. Then . . . fired by a desire to see the face of my demon, kept installing updates until I determined that the source is this damn update.


Install that, the SecuritySpy server through port 8000 (or any other port assignment you care to make) won't work. You can get access to Apache, if you fire it up, through port 80, and internet access or any other ports that are in use on this machine, do not appear to be disturbed, but this program gets cut off before the page loads. The port scan on the network utility shows and open port at 8000, but any attempt to access it results in termination of the data.

Don't install that update and it works, regardless of what other updates you install.

Maybe I'm a little too punch drunk, at the moment, to get the lessons out of this that I should, but I'll take a stab. Please feel free to add (or subtract, modify).

1. Don't "update" just to be updating. (Corollary to "don't fix it if it ain't busted).

2. Apple can and will screw up your system with updates.

3. Make required changes in a well functioning system in increments that limit the scope of your search for culprits if something goes wrong.

4. Short-cuts are not favored by the gods.

It always stings a little worse when it's self-inflicted.

I have no clue as to what is in the update that might have caused this.

12-20-2006, 06:47 PM
Yup. Updates, even minor ones, often break things for no aparrant reason. Always best to backup a known good system before installing/updating anything on a mission-critical system.

This issue is a constant topic on the DUC. You'd think people that have been through it before would learn after a while. If you want to live on the bleeding edge chances are you're gonna get cut occasionally.

12-20-2006, 07:56 PM
Sorry to hear about what "should" have been an easy update.
Glad you had the smarts to work thru and resolve the problem.


12-21-2006, 08:53 PM
I keep picking the scab. Perhaps not the best preoocupation for those who live on the bleeding edge.

I noted there were some modifications to network connections in 10.4.8 and also in Security Update 2006-007, which below I called the culpret. Apple came out with update 2006-008 on 12/19 but does not seem to be related.

The unit I have working now is running 10.4.5. In the heat of it, I don't recall whether I tested 10.4.8 without the update. It could be that it requires both sets or that the real culpret is in 10.4.8 itself. At any rate, there is a fly in this ointment - that appears to affect ports 1025 and up in some applications.

12-21-2006, 11:17 PM
And a little birdie tells me 10.4.9 is around the corner...don't do it! :rolleyes:

12-22-2006, 11:59 AM
Ah . . Yes . . . Leopard. And what will the next one be? Lion? How about Ocelot. Naw. Hummm . . duden quite have that Madison Ave. aura. How about Serval?

Well . . . . take your pick:


Happy Holidays all.


12-22-2006, 01:37 PM
Yeah, but we all know that 10.5 will change things.....I was referring to at least one more update before 10.5 shows up.

....Apple reportedly asked developers to focus their testing efforts on system components such as .Mac connectivity, Bluetooth, Bonjour, FireWire, Graphics and USB.

Other areas of testing singled out by the Mac maker included Adobe Flash, Automator, Dashboard Widgets, Fonts, iChat video conferencing and iSync.

Already, the build distributed to developers includes over a dozen fixes to problems that have turned up in previous versions of the Tiger operating system, people familiar with the software say.

Some of the bugs Tiger users can expect solutions for in the upcoming release pertained to Rosetta, USB Modem and caller ID, the Universal Access preferences pane, Bluetooth and device pairing, QC Engine, and CoreGraphics and HID Manager.

Mac OS X 10.4.9 is also said to focus heavily on enhancements to various synching technologies, bundling fixes for Mac and syncing, Sync Services Engine, Sync Services and .Mac Sync, and rsync and extended attributes.

As for 10.6, I am leaning towards Sabre Tooth. :D

12-22-2006, 01:56 PM
Yes. Could (and I belive "should") not leave it at 10.4.8. All the rest have 9s anyway.

Although Sabre Tooth does have that robust connotation, imagine the wonderful tongue twisters could stem from a name like "Serval."

Several servile "Serval" servers suddenly sync.

Practically sublime.
:D :D

12-22-2006, 06:05 PM

12-22-2006, 09:38 PM
I've got it


OS X Rex

12-23-2006, 04:03 AM

12-23-2006, 10:52 AM
Kill Two Windows Servers with One Xserve

Linked by Thom Holwerda on 2006-12-22 11:15:22 UTC, submitted by Francis Kuntz

"I have tested, and continue to run in a production setting, two instances of Windows 2003 Server hosted by Parallels Desktop, running on OS X Server 10.4.8 on a 3 GHz Xserve. To skip to the punch line, it works, and it's as fast as all get-out. Parallels does not stretch the truth when it claims near-native performance; Xserve is capable of knocking off any two-socket Netburst (Pentium 4) Xeon server going back at least two years. Compared to Xserve, those Intel boxes eat more electricity and give off more heat than they give back in capacity for work."