Graham White: My Notes

At first glance, installing slimserver (now SqueezeCenter) on the SLUG is very straight forward as it's nicely packaged into an ipkg and made available via Optware. However, as indicated on the slimserver application page on the nslu2-linux wiki, things aren't as simple as they first appear. Unfortunately, something is very broken with slimserver and its dependency chain in Optware as things stand at this moment in time. As a result installing slimserver with a view to upgrading to squeezecenter at a later date becomes much more problematic. I need at least SqueezeCenter version 7.0 to operate with the SqueezeBox Duet.

My first target was to run slimserver 6.5.4 which is the latest version from the version 6 line and the version packaged for the SLUG in optware. I tracked the problem down to the mysql dependency for slimserver, it seems since the last update of slimserver in optware, mysql has also been updated and since that time slimserver has been reported as broken on the SLUG. Unfortunately, rolling back versions in optware is not trivial since they only make available the latest version with no access to previously packaged programs. My only option was to check out the mysql build environment from SVN at the previous level and compile up the package from source. This is reported to take in the region of 18 hours natively on the SLUG so I set up a cross-compilation environment on my Fedora 8 box at home. MySQL compiled in about 10-15 minutes and I now had a package to install. The reports were correct, slimserver 6.5.4 was now running on my SLUG, excellent!

The next challenge was to get SqueezeCenter running, and this worked in a similar way to getting slimserver going. There are a few oddities with getting all your ducks in a row while running this stuff on a SLUG, SqueezeCenter is very particular about file permissions, and the newer software introduces a whole bunch of Perl dependencies not present in the earlier slimserver versions. Fortunately, I'm very familiar with Perl as well as Linux (one of the reasons for choosing a squeezebox) and I've managed to compile up the minimum dependencies to get SqueezeCenter going. It seems Slim Devices as a company test against x86 and PPC architectures to the extent they even supply their Perl dependencies for these from CPAN. I'm running on ARM on the SLUG though which introduces a whole world of dependency problems as it seems SqueezeCenter is also pretty sensitive to the version of each Perl module used, it's not just a case of grabbing the latest and greatest from CPAN, a further bind for getting it going nicely. One other thing, CPAN doesn't seem to run at all well on the SLUG, it's far faster to download the tarred packages and compile manually!

I eventually got SqueezeCenter 7.0.1 running on the SLUG, it consumes at least twice the 32MB RAM available so runs pretty slowly while spending a lot of time paging to the USB disk. I set up an additional swap file on disk as well, thinking about it perhaps I should have used the rest of the 8MB flash as swap too! All in all, running SqueezeCenter on a machine with so little memory and on an architecture not supported by Slim Devices has equated to a slow response time and a maintenance headache.

In conclusion, it's been a good experience getting a SLUG and setting up SqueezeCenter on it. But I already need a more powerful box so less than 1 week after the SLUG arrived at my house it's time to sell already. Fortunately, I've found a buyer at work who wants something low power for some really trivial services so the SLUG is ideal for them. For me though, it's a case of getting back to scratching my head over which low power home server solution to try next. Whatever I choose will be more expensive than the SLUG, it's possible I could equal its low power usage, and I definitely now know I need more memory and ideally an x86 architecture.

The decision of which media server to go with has easily been the longest and most agonising while putting together new audio solution at home. I'm not the only one at work having recently been looking in this area either, James Taylor has also been looking at home servers with similar requirements in mind to myself. Namely, cheap and low power (low electrical power for always-on as opposed to a slow processor).

In no particular order, options on the list for me were:

• Linksys NSLU2 (aka SLUG), about £55 plus a USB hard disk.
  
• Buffalo Linkstation, about £100.
  
• Netvoyager LX1000, about £100 plus a USB hard disk.
  
• Netvoyager LX1010, about £150 plus a USB hard disk.
  
• Fit-PC, about £200 £247.93 inc delivery & VAT.
  
• TinyTuxbox, starting at £200 upwards.
  
• Mac Mini, starting at £400 upwards.
  
• Self-build small form factor such as nano-itx or pico-itx, about £180 upwards. Best bang for your buck starts with the D201GLY2 mini-itx board from Intel.
  

EDIT (suggestions from comments, with my thanks):

• Pico PC, about £440 (thanks to Joel Wright, a colleague at IBM).
  
• Aleutia E2 Mini PC, about £200 plus a USB disk (thanks to Mike Rosenberg of Aleutia).
  
• Tranquil T7 Atom PC, about £240 (something I just found).
  


• Viglin MPC-L, about £79 (from Tony Whitmore)
  
• Space Cube, about £1500 and not for sale (from Dave Conway-Jones, a colleague at IBM)

END EDIT

All have clear advantages and weaknesses I wont go into in detail for each box. However, they can roughly be grouped into cheaper solutions as provided by a hacked NAS box, or more expensive PC style systems. Some go straight out of the list on price alone, such as the relatively expensive Mac (I don't understand the Mac fad, single vendor lock-in, haven't we seen that somewhere before?).


I decided to plump for the cheapest of all the options, the SLUG. I figure that even though it has a slow processor and only 32MB memory it does have a fighting chance of running SqueezeCenter to power the Squeezebox Duet based on the reports of other users running SlimServer on it. If all else fails, there are plenty of people at work looking for low power solutions who may be willing to buy a 2nd hand SLUG should I want to upgrade anyway.

The SLUG is a very well-known device in the land of hackery. It can easily be modified to run any one of several different versions of Linux that maintain different levels of compatibility with the original Linksys firmware and interface. It's purpose in life when released (back in 2004 I think) was as a cheap NAS box that simply provides a USB to Ethernet interface. The idea being you plug a cheap USB hard disk into it, configure via the simple web interface, and you have storage you can access from anywhere on your home network. Because Linksys made the device cheap, naturally their choice of operating system was a free one, Linux. The Linux license dictates Linksys had to make their source code available, hence it's easy to modify the original software for your own purposes. The rest follows from there really!

Having recently upgraded my home audio system, the choice of which media streamer to go for was not a hard decision. There are a few different manufacturers out there producing different types of hardware that would result in completely different solutions. These seem to be categorised into roughly three areas.

First, you have the traditional hi-fi system manufacturers who are adding more modern media methods to their kit. Sony have the gigajuke systems with built-in hard disks, while phillips have the streamium systems. I discounted these fairly early on as being rather expensive and full of gimicks I wouldn't really care about or use, while not providing the full functionality that I really wanted at a price I was happy with.

Next there are the traditional NAS manufacturers who are upgrading their firmware to include media streaming functionality. This was slightly more tempting in some ways than a stereo system with this functionality built in. However, the lack of remote control or feedback without a PC switched on was very off-putting here.

What I really wanted was something to stream music from a PC to an existing stereo system that provided good feedback to the user with a remote control too. Enter the third set of devices, the dedicated media streamers designed to work with various media servers such as Firefly, SlimServer, iTunes, etc. When looking at these, my choices were quickly narrowed to a set of 3 possible candidates, in descending order of price:

1. A collection of various Sonos hardware
   
2. A SqueezeBox Duet from Slim Devices (now owned by Logitech
   
3. A Pinnacle Soundbridge
   

I would have dearly liked to get my hands on the market leading Sonos which tops all the reviews while having the reviewer salivate over their nicely designed hardware, excellent interface and crystal sound quality. However, coming in at £700 sterling it seemed a bit expensive, especially as I would be spending more on another hi-fi system too, so it was reluctantly ruled out quite early on.

The next rejection waas the Pinnacle Sound Bridge, rejected for many reasons. It's easily the cheapest of the three on the list at under £100 though. I found it very difficult to find a dealer in the UK who had these things in stock so that was one rather off-putting factor - if there's no demand, then how good could the product be? The killer for me was when I compared to the Roku Soundbridge though. I found out Pinnacle license the soundbridge technology from an American firm, Roku, for marketing in Europe. That's all very well, except the European Soundbridge is inferior (much smaller and less usable display). This annoyed me to such an extent I felt I couldn't buy the European model and there are no American models for sale over here, except possibly some second hand ones on eBay.


The option I went for is the Slim Devices SqueezeBox Duet which seems like a really nice bit of kit, although not exactly cheap to buy either. It comes in two parts, the receiver box you hook up to your stereo system, and the remote control you use to browse and control the music.

The receiver is a pretty simple box, it has an Ethernet port, built-in wireless, RCA analogue audio output, and a digital output too. It sits on your network waiting for commands from the squeezebox controller and outputting any media streams it receives to a stereo (or powered speakers).

The controller is a little more interesting. It's also a wireless device, and has a jog wheel and LCD screen. Wireless means you don't have to have line of sight to the receiver, so you can hide the receiver away somewhere out of sight near your stereo. The interface is quite polished and very easy to understand. It's firmware upgradeable too so it'll only get better over time.

One of the things I really love about the SqueezeBox stuff is their openness. They use open source development to produce the SqueezeCentre (formerly slimserver) media streamer and as such it's got a nice little community of people outside the main company producing plugins to do all sorts of stuff as you can imagine. They adopt a similar approach for their firmware as well, while I've not come across the source code yet (I've not looked to see if it's available), the controller has some nice open type touches to it such as the ability to use your flickr pictures as the screensaver on the LCD screen when it's not in use. Overall I hope, and I think, I've made a good choice.