unofficial Docker Container for Record Engine

Downloads & Instructions
Post Reply
Jsherman
Posts: 180
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 1:59 am

Re: unofficial Docker Container for Record Engine

Post by Jsherman »

[/quote]
If you edit the container - what is the entry you have for Repository?
If it's a tag with just one version - you will get that indicator because it can't find signatures to compare.
For example - if I use demonrik/hdhrdvr-docker:0.2.1 I will see what you see because there is no update to the 0.2.1 tag, just the one off build.
However, if I use (which I recommend) demonrik/hdhrdvr-docker:latest then it will have signatures to compare for old versions and sees you are up to date.
[/quote]

I am not entirely sure if I am looking in the right place. I don't see an option to edit the HDHRDVR docker when I click on the icon in the Docker tab, on my Unraid system, unlike my other Dockers. That being said, when I reinstall the last line of my "docker run" command is the following.

demonrik/hdhrdvr-docker:latest

demonrik
Posts: 1591
Joined: Mon May 04, 2015 10:03 am
Device ID: 108042A1, 10814D8E
x 38

Re: unofficial Docker Container for Record Engine

Post by demonrik »

Jsherman wrote: Mon Aug 15, 2022 2:13 pm
If you edit the container - what is the entry you have for Repository?
If it's a tag with just one version - you will get that indicator because it can't find signatures to compare.
For example - if I use demonrik/hdhrdvr-docker:0.2.1 I will see what you see because there is no update to the 0.2.1 tag, just the one off build.
However, if I use (which I recommend) demonrik/hdhrdvr-docker:latest then it will have signatures to compare for old versions and sees you are up to date.
I am not entirely sure if I am looking in the right place. I don't see an option to edit the HDHRDVR docker when I click on the icon in the Docker tab, on my Unraid system, unlike my other Dockers. That being said, when I reinstall the last line of my "docker run" command is the following.

demonrik/hdhrdvr-docker:latest
If you add with 'docker run' then I believe (could be wrong) the docker UI (dockerMan) in unraid doesn't have an XML template file created for the docker and it won't allow you to manage it.
CA does have a default template there you can add from - but you'ld need to add the DVRUI_PORT, PGID, PUID at least.. I believe it picks up the volume bindings from the Dockerfile
You can switch over to the template by stopping the docker, delete everything in /dvrdata and then add the template and make sure you update the above environment params and the volume bindings.

Jsherman
Posts: 180
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 1:59 am

Re: unofficial Docker Container for Record Engine

Post by Jsherman »

[/quote]
If you add with 'docker run' then I believe (could be wrong) the docker UI (dockerMan) in unraid doesn't have an XML template file created for the docker and it won't allow you to manage it.
CA does have a default template there you can add from - but you'ld need to add the DVRUI_PORT, PGID, PUID at least.. I believe it picks up the volume bindings from the Dockerfile
You can switch over to the template by stopping the docker, delete everything in /dvrdata and then add the template and make sure you update the above environment params and the volume bindings.
[/quote]

OK, so there was mass confusion on my part. I was installing the DVR docker solely from terminal, not the docker page on my Unraid server. I have since added the docker via the "Add Container" button and filling out the form. Now I can see the options that I wasn't seeing before, such as Repository and Dock Icon options. After working on it for some time, I have my DVR installed and running again.

So thank you again for your assistance on this. Linux is slowly becoming my second OS.

One concern I have is when I check the logs I am getting this error popping up every second or so.

nginx: [emerg] bind() to 0.0.0.0:80 failed (98: Address in use)
2022-08-18 03:55:59,329 INFO success: nginx entered RUNNING state, process has stayed up for > than 1 seconds (startsecs)


My PiHole is using port 80, would you recommend changing nginx's port to 80 or should I change PiHole's or is this an issue I don't need to worry too much about as everything seems to be working?

demonrik
Posts: 1591
Joined: Mon May 04, 2015 10:03 am
Device ID: 108042A1, 10814D8E
x 38

Re: unofficial Docker Container for Record Engine

Post by demonrik »

Jsherman wrote: Wed Aug 17, 2022 9:18 pm
If you add with 'docker run' then I believe (could be wrong) the docker UI (dockerMan) in unraid doesn't have an XML template file created for the docker and it won't allow you to manage it.
CA does have a default template there you can add from - but you'ld need to add the DVRUI_PORT, PGID, PUID at least.. I believe it picks up the volume bindings from the Dockerfile
You can switch over to the template by stopping the docker, delete everything in /dvrdata and then add the template and make sure you update the above environment params and the volume bindings.
OK, so there was mass confusion on my part. I was installing the DVR docker solely from terminal, not the docker page on my Unraid server. I have since added the docker via the "Add Container" button and filling out the form. Now I can see the options that I wasn't seeing before, such as Repository and Dock Icon options. After working on it for some time, I have my DVR installed and running again.

So thank you again for your assistance on this. Linux is slowly becoming my second OS.

One concern I have is when I check the logs I am getting this error popping up every second or so.

nginx: [emerg] bind() to 0.0.0.0:80 failed (98: Address in use)
2022-08-18 03:55:59,329 INFO success: nginx entered RUNNING state, process has stayed up for > than 1 seconds (startsecs)


My PiHole is using port 80, would you recommend changing nginx's port to 80 or should I change PiHole's or is this an issue I don't need to worry too much about as everything seems to be working?
You need to add an environment parameter or variable in Unraid terminology for DVRUI_PORT and set to an unmapped port. I set things high, hence I use 59080. Generally anything over 32768 is fair game for you to manage yourself
So edit the container and select ' Add another Path, Port, Variable, Label or Device' set the config type to Variable, key to DVRUI_PORT and value to the number u want to use

Jsherman
Posts: 180
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 1:59 am

Re: unofficial Docker Container for Record Engine

Post by Jsherman »

[/quote]
You need to add an environment parameter or variable in Unraid terminology for DVRUI_PORT and set to an unmapped port. I set things high, hence I use 59080. Generally anything over 32768 is fair game for you to manage yourself
So edit the container and select ' Add another Path, Port, Variable, Label or Device' set the config type to Variable, key to DVRUI_PORT and value to the number u want to use
[/quote]

I added that variable, but perhaps I added it incorrectly?

https://imgur.com/a/bXKvgk0

TBlankenheim
Posts: 101
Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 9:15 am
Device ID: 107BBE13, 10782AED
Location: Madison, WI
x 2

Re: unofficial Docker Container for Record Engine

Post by TBlankenheim »

Jsherman wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 8:27 am I added that variable, but perhaps I added it incorrectly?

https://imgur.com/a/bXKvgk0
You need to add DVRUI_PORT as a Variable rather than a Port. Also, you should probably use 59080 for the UI port. 59090 conflicts with the port used by the Record Engine.

Jsherman
Posts: 180
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 1:59 am

Re: unofficial Docker Container for Record Engine

Post by Jsherman »

[/quote]
You need to add DVRUI_PORT as a Variable rather than a Port. Also, you should probably use 59080 for the UI port. 59090 conflicts with the port used by the Record Engine.
[/quote]

Thank you, that resolved my issue!

Darn my lack of Docker knowledge thinking that a network port should be considered a port rather than a Variable.

NewGuy
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2022 2:49 pm

Re: unofficial Docker Container for Record Engine

Post by NewGuy »

I just changed from the "unsupported" implementation to this. I have the container running and it seems to work although I don't completely understand it all yet. I created 2 volumes for the container in my Synology container configuration.

Image

Not sure how the container knows to use them though. I get the feeling they are not being used. I recorded something and it did not appear to show up in the mounted file system folder for DVR recordings. I get the feeling it's recording to a folder within the container that isn't actually mounted to the NAS folder I wanted. Is there a variable I can set to point it to the correct folder I have mounted? Here are my container logs.

I would like to be able to load my old DVR recordings from this mounted folder, but also not sure if that's possible.

demonrik
Posts: 1591
Joined: Mon May 04, 2015 10:03 am
Device ID: 108042A1, 10814D8E
x 38

Re: unofficial Docker Container for Record Engine

Post by demonrik »

NewGuy wrote: Sat Aug 27, 2022 10:08 am I just changed from the "unsupported" implementation to this. I have the container running and it seems to work although I don't completely understand it all yet. I created 2 volumes for the container in my Synology container configuration.

Image

Not sure how the container knows to use them though. I get the feeling they are not being used. I recorded something and it did not appear to show up in the mounted file system folder for DVR recordings. I get the feeling it's recording to a folder within the container that isn't actually mounted to the NAS folder I wanted. Is there a variable I can set to point it to the correct folder I have mounted? Here are my container logs.

I would like to be able to load my old DVR recordings from this mounted folder, but also not sure if that's possible.
Judging by the /volume1 and the screenshot I'm guessing you are on Synology
And you are right - you're not using the paths you think you are.
The File/Folder and Mount Path are the wrong way round.. And you don't want the full names of the path.
Lets use your first entry
you want File/Folder to be /HDHomeRunDVR and Mount Path should just be /dvrrec.
If /volume1/HDHomeRunDVR is the same share that you have the recordings from the SPK or the Silicondust Installer then you are pointing it correctly.. we may have permissions to sort though.

Recomend you have a read of my rudimentry guide to explain the move from SPK to container here https://github.com/demonrik/HDHR-DVR-do ... -Container
As I don't have a working Synology NAS I'm relying on others help - both @AnalogBill here and @timodreynolds on the discord channel have confirmed this working for there Synology's.
best of luck - here to help.

EDIT: I screwed up the /dvrrec file/folder - shouldn't have the /volume1.. removed

NewGuy
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2022 2:49 pm

Re: unofficial Docker Container for Record Engine

Post by NewGuy »

Ah I didn't realize there was a guide. Thank you for that. I just started over and followed the guide. I created the user, gave it r/w permission to the new ContainerData and the existing HDHomeRuneDVR folders, and set my environment variables. The container starts with this new configuration, but unfortunately it seems less healthy this time around. I can get to the web page, but it returns "Error invalid status: +: status: 500" error on the main page and says "Unable to discover DVR version". I can access the debug log under the gear on the right side though. Logs provided on my OneDrive:

Container Log
Debug log

NewGuy
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2022 2:49 pm

Re: unofficial Docker Container for Record Engine

Post by NewGuy »

Seems strange that I created a user, gave it permission to the folders, but the container doesn't know the password for that user.

NewGuy
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2022 2:49 pm

Re: unofficial Docker Container for Record Engine

Post by NewGuy »

I was thinking I probably should not have just edited the existing container. This morning I created a brand new container from scratch. I'm no longer seeing any errors when I visit the URL with a browser, but when I run the HDHomeRun app it's not discovering the DVR anymore. Not sure why. Any thoughts?

I'm noticing the dvr.conf has:

RecordPath=/HDHomeRunDVR/recordings

Should I move my old recordings to a /recordings subfolder so it finds them?

Also, in your guide you mention using port 59080 in your instructions even though the Synology Web Station option seems to force 59090 (which is in your first screenshot). That might cause some confusion for people trying to implement. The container would respond on 59080, but the Web Station URL they are prompted to create won't work - unless I'm missing something.

demonrik
Posts: 1591
Joined: Mon May 04, 2015 10:03 am
Device ID: 108042A1, 10814D8E
x 38

Re: unofficial Docker Container for Record Engine

Post by demonrik »

NewGuy wrote: Sat Aug 27, 2022 2:58 pm Ah I didn't realize there was a guide.
The guide wasn't published when you started - I just happened to finish it the night before and was waiting to press the publish button. Just happy co-incidence :)
NewGuy wrote: Sun Aug 28, 2022 9:57 am I was thinking I probably should not have just edited the existing container. This morning I created a brand new container from scratch. I'm no longer seeing any errors when I visit the URL with a browser, but when I run the HDHomeRun app it's not discovering the DVR anymore. Not sure why. Any thoughts?
Make sure you selected host and not bridge networking when you create the container
I'm noticing the dvr.conf has:

RecordPath=/HDHomeRunDVR/recordings

Should I move my old recordings to a /recordings subfolder so it finds them?
the /dvrrec bniding is mounted to that path internally in the container, don't edit it.
Also, in your guide you mention using port 59080 in your instructions even though the Synology Web Station option seems to force 59090 (which is in your first screenshot). That might cause some confusion for people trying to implement. The container would respond on 59080, but the Web Station URL they are prompted to create won't work - unless I'm missing something.
There are 2 ports.
1st in dvr.conf which is where the record engine will listen for connections from the applications - this is defaulted to 59090 on anything I create.
2nd is the port for the PHP UI for the DVR Manager that I've included in the container - this defaults to port 80, but can conflict with other apps and containers and should be set to something else via DVRUI_PORT and my recommendation is 59080 as outlined in the guide.

I honestly don't know what the web station option does or means - is unique to Synology.. It defaults to 59090 since 59090 is published in the container.

AnalogBill
Posts: 22
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2021 6:23 am
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana

Re: unofficial Docker Container for Record Engine

Post by AnalogBill »

Webstation is not required for the Docker version. For the .spk Webstation assures that you have PHP and a webserver. Since both are built into the docker container Webstation is not needed. If Webstaion is installed, it will not interfere. Use -e DVRUI_PORT=59080

NewGuy
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2022 2:49 pm

Re: unofficial Docker Container for Record Engine

Post by NewGuy »

There are 2 ports.
1st in dvr.conf which is where the record engine will listen for connections from the applications - this is defaulted to 59090 on anything I create.
2nd is the port for the PHP UI for the DVR Manager that I've included in the container - this defaults to port 80, but can conflict with other apps and containers and should be set to something else via DVRUI_PORT and my recommendation is 59080 as outlined in the guide.
Ah ha. I kind of assumed it was a mistake in your guide, but that's an important distinction I was missing. My recording engine was conflicting with my UI port, but I recreated the container once again and it's working as expected.
I honestly don't know what the web station option does or means - is unique to Synology.. It defaults to 59090 since 59090 is published in the container.
Web Station let's you use virtual host names you make up to point to whatever internal website you have running. For example, rather than having to use something like http://nas1:59080/ I could use http://mysupercooldvr and not worry about remembering the nonstandard port. The problem is Web Station is automatically set up to use the container's port, but in this case I actually would want Web Station to point to the DVRUI_PORT. I'm not sure how to change that in Web Station so by default it appears to get set up for your container, but then it doesn't work as expected. Knowing that I would think it's probably best to have users skip the Web Station checkbox option when creating the container.

In the end my recording engine is working as expected now and my old recordings show up. Thanks for all your help!

Post Reply