DVD Movies on OpenSolaris?
Larry Lindstrom
I've been looking at this topic on Google's archives, and I don't
think I'm going to like the answer, but I thought I'd ask.
Has anybody been able to use Totem, or anything else, to play
commercial DVDs and DVDs recorded with home DVD recorders on Solaris
or OpenSolaris?
If so, how?
Thanks
Larry
Doug McIntyre
> I've been looking at this topic on Google's archives, and I don't
>think I'm going to like the answer, but I thought I'd ask.
> Has anybody been able to use Totem, or anything else, to play
>commercial DVDs and DVDs recorded with home DVD recorders on Solaris
>or OpenSolaris?
Get VLC and install it to watch things.
For a commercial entity to ship a player that properly decodes
commercial DVDs and license the encryption code requires a bunch of
paperwork and money and closed-source licensing to the proper license holders.
Opensource and freely distributer can't exist for a properly licensed
DVD player application in most locals that they'd ship to.
Your use of VLC may or may not violate licensing agreements for your
country, although that usually doesn't stop most people from using it
after it obtaining it directly.
Chris Ridd
> Larry Lindstrom <larryl...@hotmail.com> writes:
>> I've been looking at this topic on Google's archives, and I don't
>> think I'm going to like the answer, but I thought I'd ask.
>
>> Has anybody been able to use Totem, or anything else, to play
>> commercial DVDs and DVDs recorded with home DVD recorders on Solaris
>> or OpenSolaris?
>
>
> Get VLC and install it to watch things.
>
> For a commercial entity to ship a player that properly decodes
> commercial DVDs and license the encryption code requires a bunch of
> paperwork and money and closed-source licensing to the proper license holders.
Fluendo - who sell licensed media codecs for OpenSolaris x86 (and other
OSes) - are porting their licensed DVD player to OpenSolaris.
<http://www.fluendo.com/shop/product/fluendo-dvd-player/>
--
Chris
Casper H.S. Dik
>Hi Folks:
> If so, how?
It is possible certainly with ogle.
Casper
--
Expressed in this posting are my opinions. They are in no way related
to opinions held by my employer, Sun Microsystems.
Statements on Sun products included here are not gospel and may
be fiction rather than truth.
sol
Well, I managed to play DVDs using mplayer, but if you're not used to
console commands installing it is a little tricky.
You can find mplayer at Blastwave
http://www.blastwave.org/pkg/pkgcontents.ftd?software=mplayer&style=brief&state=5&arch=i386
or at Sunfreepacks
http://www.sunfreepacks.com/listing/?limit=10&offset=40
If you want to install it by Sunfreepacks, here's a guide for you (only
in Italian, sorry, but you can type the commands in terminal)
http://marcofalchi.blogspot.com/2009/04/opensolaris-mplayer-sunfreepackscom.html
Hope it can help.
solx
> Larry Lindstrom <larryl...@hotmail.com> writes:
>
>> Hi Folks:
>
>> I've been looking at this topic on Google's archives, and I don't
>> think I'm going to like the answer, but I thought I'd ask.
>
>> Has anybody been able to use Totem, or anything else, to play
>> commercial DVDs and DVDs recorded with home DVD recorders on Solaris
>> or OpenSolaris?
>
>> If so, how?
>
> It is possible certainly with ogle.
>
> Casper
Hi,
I have used Ogle (downloaded from OpenCSW or Blastwave) for a while and
it is very good at playing commercial DVDs. However the
OpenCSW/Blastwave version will not play DVD-R recorded on a DVD Recorder
(personally tried Sharp and Philips units). I did contact the one of the
Ogle team and sent a home recorded DVD for the problem to be analysed.
Can there notes on how to get Totem to work correctly with DVDs. Is it
just a matter of putting a copy of libddvdcss in the correct directory.
I have tried running VLC under WinXP in a VirtualBox client and it works
rather well but only by mounting the DVD as an iso image in the Vbox.
Larry Lindstrom
Thanks Everybody:
I'm up to my ears in other tasks right now, but I'll check these
out as soon as I can.
Larry
Andrew Gabriel
solx <nos...@example.net> writes:
> Hi,
>
> I have used Ogle (downloaded from OpenCSW or Blastwave) for a while and
> it is very good at playing commercial DVDs. However the
> OpenCSW/Blastwave version will not play DVD-R recorded on a DVD Recorder
> (personally tried Sharp and Philips units). I did contact the one of the
> Ogle team and sent a home recorded DVD for the problem to be analysed.
> Can there notes on how to get Totem to work correctly with DVDs. Is it
> just a matter of putting a copy of libddvdcss in the correct directory.
The totem supplied with Solaris seems to be missing all codecs,
and unable to play anything at all. (Can't think why it's shipped.)
The Blastwave totem works better. It seems to have been built to
look for and use the Windows Media Player DLLs if you add them, so
you can play windows media files. Conversely, it doesn't seem to
have been built to look for libdvdcss, so even if you build this
and give it to totem, it doesn't use it and can't play encrypted
DVDs - it still uses it's internal libdvdread (IIRC) which is the
API compatible version without decryption support. Also, I've
noticed that some change in recent Nevada font support has broken
Blastwave totem -- all characters are square boxes. It still works,
if you can remember where the menu items you need are, and it might
still work in some locales, but I haven't spent any time trying.
Last time I looked (probably a year back), there wasn't anyone
maintaining the Blastwave totem anymore, the maintainer having
retired.
--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]
Chris Cox
As a fluendo owner, just be warned, their player isn't half the player
that things like vlc, mplayer, xine, etc. are.
This is one of those cases where free is definitely superior.... albeit
illegal in the good ole USA where creativity is squashed and we worry
about things that do not matter.
John D Groenveld
Chris Cox <chris...@endlessnow.com> wrote:
>As a fluendo owner, just be warned, their player isn't half the player
>that things like vlc, mplayer, xine, etc. are.
What bugs have you encountered with Fluendo?
John
groe...@acm.org
Chris Cox
Current version at least works somewhat. First version was pretty much
DOA. Later rev had annoying problems... things would die if you selected
this or that. I did complain. I did upgrade... and upgrade and upgrade...
The picture quality isn't as sharp as mplayer or xine. Fast forwarding
or rewinding usually kills the player pretty easily. It's just not
as robust.
Little features like fullscreen with controls don't work right... there's
lots of little annoyances even when the player seems to be operating
somewhat. It gets confused VERY easily when doing things (operating
controls, dvd menus, etc.).
Chris Ridd
Are you still talking here about Fluendo's DVD player, or their codecs?
--
Chris
Chris Cox
...
>
> Are you still talking here about Fluendo's DVD player, or their codecs?
DVD player. One of two legal DVD players for Linux (afaik).
I suppose you could build your own app around their library somehow... but
not sure they provide a DVD library (fear of creating a dvdcss like thing).
Andreas F. Borchert
On 2009-10-04, Larry Lindstrom <larryl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Has anybody been able to use Totem, or anything else, to play
> commercial DVDs and DVDs recorded with home DVD recorders on Solaris
> or OpenSolaris?
Xine has no problems playing commercial DVDs and recorded DVDs under
Solaris. Just install the corresponding Blastwave package xineui
and all its dependencies, see http://www.blastwave.org/.
Andreas.
Canuck57
I would just load a Linux with MythTV.
yourmommycalled
Except linux sucks so badly that you really don't want to use it as
you install it. Linux is better than winblows, but now where near as
nice as solaris Think of it this way: winblows to linux is like being
asked if you wanted to tortured until you die or would you like your
eye poked out. linux is to soliars is like being asked if you want
your eye poked out or would like a million dollars a month for life.
Canuck57
I look at it this way, while Solaris internals are about the best going,
it's driver support sucks. Where are ICH9R drivers? 9/10 Quad
processors have some ICH?R chipset in them and the SATA doesn't work.
The same can be said about OS2.... Solaris is challenged in some ways
mostly around driver support.
Linux more often than not has them. One other stong point is Linux
isn't so encumbered with Java for it's applications.
Don't get me wrong, I like Solaris but it isn't the only trick this
person person is going to limit oneself too.
Casper H.S. Dik
>I look at it this way, while Solaris internals are about the best going,
>it's driver support sucks. Where are ICH9R drivers? 9/10 Quad
>processors have some ICH?R chipset in them and the SATA doesn't work.
>The same can be said about OS2.... Solaris is challenged in some ways
>mostly around driver support.
When did you last look? ICH9 is supported since at least 10u5; or
are you talking about ICH9R configured in raid mode?
Chris Ridd
> Canuck57 <Canu...@nospam.com> writes:
>
>> I look at it this way, while Solaris internals are about the best going,
>> it's driver support sucks. Where are ICH9R drivers? 9/10 Quad
>> processors have some ICH?R chipset in them and the SATA doesn't work.
>> The same can be said about OS2.... Solaris is challenged in some ways
>> mostly around driver support.
>
> When did you last look? ICH9 is supported since at least 10u5; or
> are you talking about ICH9R configured in raid mode?
Assuming Canuck57 did mean the latter, what's preventing Sun from
adding support for this?
--
Chris
Canuck57
> Canuck57 <Canu...@nospam.com> writes:
>
>> I look at it this way, while Solaris internals are about the best going,
>> it's driver support sucks. Where are ICH9R drivers? 9/10 Quad
>> processors have some ICH?R chipset in them and the SATA doesn't work.
>> The same can be said about OS2.... Solaris is challenged in some ways
>> mostly around driver support.
>
> When did you last look? ICH9 is supported since at least 10u5; or
> are you talking about ICH9R configured in raid mode?
>
> Casper
Only if your BIOS supports IDE compatibility modes, many BIOS do not
support this. SATA has been around for some time. Like ST506, IDE is
history. I have U7, and have tried the Java compatabiltiy thing and it
still does not recognise drivers for ICH9R, yet it clearly identifies
the chipset. Even if I had the IDE option in the BIOS, why dumb down to
IDE when you have SATA?
I haven't checked U8 yet, but suspect it too will not work.
Casper H.S. Dik
>Only if your BIOS supports IDE compatibility modes, many BIOS do not
>support this. SATA has been around for some time. Like ST506, IDE is
>history. I have U7, and have tried the Java compatabiltiy thing and it
>still does not recognise drivers for ICH9R, yet it clearly identifies
>the chipset. Even if I had the IDE option in the BIOS, why dumb down to
>IDE when you have SATA?
That's not true; it should be able to detect the ICH[6789] SATA
chipsets and use them with the "ahci" driver (native SATA).
However, if it's a ICH[6789]R chipset, then you should be able to
disable the "R" part with the BIOS (JBOD mode) but that's not always
possible.
I wouldn't use a "motherboard RAID" simply because it's typically NOT
possible to move a disk connected to a "motherboard RAID" to another
system.
Canuck57
It isn't just ICH9R, if I look the problem can be seen with any Intel or
ATI/AMD chipset out there that have RAID ability and SATA. For example,
SB700/SB800 also has no adaptive drivers. The output of the Device
Detection Tool suggests "Set the SATA controller (device no. 2 in above
report) to a non-Raid mode in BIOS, and run this tool again." and it
isn't even in RAID mode.
Problem is, these options are not available in BIOS. And these are very
popular ASUS mobos inside. If you look through Google, this has been
going on for years and is not a new issue.
OpenSolaris, same issues. Fedora and Ubuntu have no issues.
Andrew Gabriel
Disable the RAID in the BIOS. Then Solaris will probably use the
controller (depends on the BIOS correctly indicating that though).
There's no hardware raid in the ICH chipsets anyway - the only
RAID support is in the BIOS INT functions for booting. Anything
after that requires a volume manager in the OS which uses the
same volume management structures laid out by the BIOS RAID
manager.
Solaris deliberately won't touch the controller if it's marked
as RAID (unless it's a real hardware RAID controller which Solaris
supports), as it won't know if the disks are in use or about the
RAID structures put on them by the BIOS, so it would inevitably
corrupt them, particularly with RAID like that used by the ICH
where the controller doesn't do the RAID.
Casper H.S. Dik
>It isn't just ICH9R, if I look the problem can be seen with any Intel or
>ATI/AMD chipset out there that have RAID ability and SATA. For example,
>SB700/SB800 also has no adaptive drivers. The output of the Device
>Detection Tool suggests "Set the SATA controller (device no. 2 in above
>report) to a non-Raid mode in BIOS, and run this tool again." and it
>isn't even in RAID mode.
The SB700 is also support by the ahci driver; if it is not recognized then
it is possible that the BIOS improperly programs the classcode of the
device. There's a bug which affects builds 122 and 123 (disks not
recognized on SB600/700)
What is the classcode of the devices in question?
The same devices (SB700/SB750/SB800) are working on other systems.
Canuck57
> Canuck57 <Canu...@nospam.com> writes:
>
>> Only if your BIOS supports IDE compatibility modes, many BIOS do not
>> support this. SATA has been around for some time. Like ST506, IDE is
>> history. I have U7, and have tried the Java compatabiltiy thing and it
>> still does not recognise drivers for ICH9R, yet it clearly identifies
>> the chipset. Even if I had the IDE option in the BIOS, why dumb down to
>> IDE when you have SATA?
>
> That's not true; it should be able to detect the ICH[6789] SATA
> chipsets and use them with the "ahci" driver (native SATA).
>
> However, if it's a ICH[6789]R chipset, then you should be able to
> disable the "R" part with the BIOS (JBOD mode) but that's not always
> possible.
Many mobos today, you can't disable it.
> I wouldn't use a "motherboard RAID" simply because it's typically NOT
> possible to move a disk connected to a "motherboard RAID" to another
> system.
Agreed unless it is the same destination MB type. But agree, I prefer
SW mirroring with SVM over the HW. None the less, the new SATA chipsets
have RAID and a volume of 1. And Solaris can't deal with it. And it
isn't uncomon as I think almost all quad Intel/AMD come this way today.
http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=190077
Acer Q6600 ICH9R/P33 8GB Ram, 1 x 1TB SATA HD
HP AMD X4 9550 SB700/SB80 8GB Ram, 1 x 750GB SATA HD
^ Cannot run Solaris unless in a VM with a Linux or Vista host OS.
Canuck57
> Canuck57 <Canu...@nospam.com> writes:
>
>> It isn't just ICH9R, if I look the problem can be seen with any Intel or
>> ATI/AMD chipset out there that have RAID ability and SATA. For example,
>> SB700/SB800 also has no adaptive drivers. The output of the Device
>> Detection Tool suggests "Set the SATA controller (device no. 2 in above
>> report) to a non-Raid mode in BIOS, and run this tool again." and it
>> isn't even in RAID mode.
>
> The SB700 is also support by the ahci driver; if it is not recognized then
> it is possible that the BIOS improperly programs the classcode of the
> device. There's a bug which affects builds 122 and 123 (disks not
> recognized on SB600/700)
>
> What is the classcode of the devices in question?
>
> The same devices (SB700/SB750/SB800) are working on other systems.
>
> Casper
I pushed the results up with the detection tool, I am sure the stats are
up there. The detection tool would not allow me to cut and paste the
codes, and I am not going to waste time to copy type it or burn a boot
cd for it.
The fact remains, Solaris (open or in general distribution form) can
only operate on the systems capable of legacy mode ahci operations when
using ICH{7/8/9/10}R and SB700/SB800. It is that simple.
While Sun does have systems they sell using ICH?R, they have special and
incompatible drivers, something like dmfe drivers when they first came out.
Marketing?
yourmommycalled
Ok so you have a popular motherboard which breaks a bunch of rules and
has serious bios problems. Linux developers are willing to waste time
writing work around code. Solaris developers have decided that rather
than wasting time writing code to work around problems with a buggy
bios, which will introduce a a whole new set of bugs, they will
concentrate on writing stable code that works with motherboards that
have bios that aren't so buggy. If you use junk you get what you pay
for.
Casper H.S. Dik
>The fact remains, Solaris (open or in general distribution form) can
>only operate on the systems capable of legacy mode ahci operations when
>using ICH{7/8/9/10}R and SB700/SB800. It is that simple.
I would still say that's a bug in the BIOS; if you haven't
configured a RAID, it should not label the disks as "RAID controller".
>While Sun does have systems they sell using ICH?R, they have special and
>incompatible drivers, something like dmfe drivers when they first came out.
I'm not sure what you're talking about; dmfe is a ethernet driver.
Marketing has little to do how we develop drivers but in some cases,
we use a particular chip and we write a driver for only that chip even
though other systems use similar trips. (And this is clearly wrong and
we try to get all those similar chips controller with the same driver)
Andrew Gabriel
yourmommycalled <mommy...@gmail.com> writes:
> Ok so you have a popular motherboard which breaks a bunch of rules and
> has serious bios problems. Linux developers are willing to waste time
> writing work around code. Solaris developers have decided that rather
> than wasting time writing code to work around problems with a buggy
> bios, which will introduce a a whole new set of bugs, they will
> concentrate on writing stable code that works with motherboards that
> have bios that aren't so buggy. If you use junk you get what you pay
> for.
It's not simply a question of wasting time writing code.
We deliberately don't touch a disk if the BIOS says it's RAIDed,
and there's no hardware/controller handling the RAID, and we
have no idea what the data structures relating to the RAID/volume
management are. We would be pretty much guaranteed to corrupt the
disk, and that's far worse than not touching it in the first place.
It's kind of hard to tell reliably if the BIOS is telling lies.
If you have some suggestions, raise an RFE (or ask one of us to
do so), or even work on contributing some code yourself.
It sounds like Canuck57 has a motherboard which is designed for
RAID-only operation (as it can't be disabled) which requires
software RAID drivers which aren't available for Solaris.
Canuck57
> Canuck57 <Canu...@nospam.com> writes:
>
>> The fact remains, Solaris (open or in general distribution form) can
>> only operate on the systems capable of legacy mode ahci operations when
>> using ICH{7/8/9/10}R and SB700/SB800. It is that simple.
>
> I would still say that's a bug in the BIOS; if you haven't
> configured a RAID, it should not label the disks as "RAID controller".
>
>> While Sun does have systems they sell using ICH?R, they have special and
>> incompatible drivers, something like dmfe drivers when they first came out.
>
> I'm not sure what you're talking about; dmfe is a ethernet driver.
> Marketing has little to do how we develop drivers but in some cases,
> we use a particular chip and we write a driver for only that chip even
> though other systems use similar trips. (And this is clearly wrong and
> we try to get all those similar chips controller with the same driver)
>
> Casper
Casper, I don't mean to come off ignorant, but SATA and these chipsets
have been around for awhile now. We could ask vendors to supply ISA and
a ST506 controller too... but like most technology it ages out and gets
orphaned like the ISA/ST506...
Solaris needs to keep up, or likely it will join OS2, DG-UX, IRIS, Tru64
and others. It's SATA drivers are an achilles heal. Ya, I know they
exist, but they don't work very well and not on many systems we mortals buy.
As for dmfe, I know it is a ethernet driver. But it took years before
the standard media had the drivers, you had to download them special.
Canuck57
Make it plural. One is ICH9R and the other is SB700/800. Intel and
AMD, quit popular ASUS and MSI mobos too.
I haven't tested the AMD system that much yet, but the only OS I
couldn't get going was Solaris. Fedora, Ubuntu, Vista and even a
slipped streamed XP.
This is not an uncommon problem.
Casper H.S. Dik
>Make it plural. One is ICH9R and the other is SB700/800. Intel and
>AMD, quit popular ASUS and MSI mobos too.
I'm assuming that you don't run Solaris on them. Can you post
(or mail) the "scanpci -v" for both systems?
We know that it works on some motherboard but clearly not others.
Canuck57
> Canuck57 <Canu...@nospam.com> writes:
>
>> Make it plural. One is ICH9R and the other is SB700/800. Intel and
>> AMD, quit popular ASUS and MSI mobos too.
>
> I'm assuming that you don't run Solaris on them. Can you post
> (or mail) the "scanpci -v" for both systems?
>
> We know that it works on some motherboard but clearly not others.
>
> Casper
This is copy type using the Sun Device Detection tool.
HP M9715F - AMD X4 9650 - 8GM RAM, 750GB SATA HD - 100% stock
Solaris Driver 32-bit: No Solaris Driver
Solaris Driver 64-bit: No Solaris Driver
Devide Type: Storage
Vendor Name: ATI Technologies
Device Name: SB700/SB800 SATA Controller [Non-RAID5 mode]
Vendor ID: 1002
Device ID: 4392
Sub IDs: 103c,2a7f
Rev: 00
Acer M5620 - Q6600 - 8GB RAM, 1TB SATA HD - Added memory and newer HD
and nVidea 9500 added. Otherwise stock.
Solaris Driver 32-bit: No Solaris Driver
Solaris Driver 64-bit: No Solaris Driver
Devide Type: Storage
Vendor Name: Intel Corporation
Device Name: 82801 SATA RAID Controller
Vendor ID: 8086
Device ID: 2822
Sub IDs: 1019,2635
Rev: 02
Casper H.S. Dik
>HP M9715F - AMD X4 9650 - 8GM RAM, 750GB SATA HD - 100% stock
>Solaris Driver 32-bit: No Solaris Driver
>Solaris Driver 64-bit: No Solaris Driver
>Devide Type: Storage
>Vendor Name: ATI Technologies
>Device Name: SB700/SB800 SATA Controller [Non-RAID5 mode]
>Vendor ID: 1002
>Device ID: 4392
>Sub IDs: 103c,2a7f
>Rev: 00
>Acer M5620 - Q6600 - 8GB RAM, 1TB SATA HD - Added memory and newer HD
>and nVidea 9500 added. Otherwise stock.
>Solaris Driver 32-bit: No Solaris Driver
>Solaris Driver 64-bit: No Solaris Driver
>Devide Type: Storage
>Vendor Name: Intel Corporation
>Device Name: 82801 SATA RAID Controller
>Vendor ID: 8086
>Device ID: 2822
>Sub IDs: 1019,2635
>Rev: 02
Unfortunately, and that is our fault, we'd need to know the
"class" of the file.
Both devices, if configured as JOBS controllers, they should be
registered as "PCI Class 010601"
Canuck57
Class code: 00010400
Both have the same class code.
Casper H.S. Dik
>Class code: 00010400
>Both have the same class code.
So that's why Solaris can't deal with them, it advertises the
controlers as a "RAID" controller. Not sure how you can
rectify that in the OS. (Clearly possible, as Ubuntu can work
with those devices)
Canuck57
> Canuck57 <Canu...@nospam.com> writes:
>
>> Class code: 00010400
>
>> Both have the same class code.
>
> So that's why Solaris can't deal with them, it advertises the
> controlers as a "RAID" controller. Not sure how you can
> rectify that in the OS. (Clearly possible, as Ubuntu can work
> with those devices)
>
> Casper
Yep, Solaris only recognizes 0010600 or something. Problem is many
mobo's today in the quad proc arena can't do that. I tried hacking away
at driver configs and the /etc/??cf but got no where.
Makes me wonder what was on the mobo of the short lived Ultra 24...
In any case, there are lots of perfectly good quad core (AMD and Intel)
systems using these chipsets that simply can't run Solaris nor
OpenSolaris. But they do run in VMs... but I hesitate in putting my
DVD/movie images inside a 2TB VM and don't trust MS-Windows with them.
So Fedora Linux becomes my choice.
MS-Windows for boys, X-Windows for men...