Brickfrog

Four spaces before the line you want to codify :)

e.g.

UUID=“your uuid” /mnt/external exfat defaults,uid=1000,gid=“your group id”,umask=002,nofail 0 0

vs non-formatted

UUID=“your uuid” /mnt/external exfat defaults,uid=1000,gid=“your group id”,umask=002,nofail 0 0

Are the files within the folders the media folder also with permissions 775 (rwxrwxr-x)? The actual .mkv .mp4 or whatever files themselves should be the same permissions as the parent folder(s). Could be worth doing a chmod -R 0775 d64ea996-98aa-4eef-8a93-0a2ba2246f0f if you’re not sure.

You probably already tried this but just in case: In the Jellyfin admin pages, in Libraries, try removing that media library, then re-add the media library and when adding Folders paste in your entire media folder path/name: /media/velummortis/d64ea996-98aa-4eef-8a93-0a2ba2246f0f

The reason I mention that is that I did a quick test here with a bad permissioned folder, added the media folder, Jellyfin couldn’t see anything in it obviously. But even after I fixed the folder permissions Jellyfin still wasn’t seeing the media - I had to remove the library entirely and then re-add it to force Jellyfin to attempt to scan the folder with new 775 world permissions.

Also using Debian + Jellyfin normal install with basic permissions (in the future maybe I’ll try this with ACL permissions).

Starting out I tinkered with creating a specific user group for jellyfin but it never quite worked right… in the end I reset the jellyfin user/service back to defaults and set permissions on my media folders to 0775 so that the jellyfin service can read/execute (no write) as the world permission bit. Also made sure to set permissions recursively (chmod -R). For me it’s fine though keep in mind setting 5 for world does mean all users with access to your system can read and traverse through those media folders.

Just to be sure, did you already test that the port is actually open and forwarded? e.g. with your torrent client running browse to a port test website like https://canyouseeme.org/ , https://www.yougetsignal.com/tools/open-ports/ , etc. put in your torrent client’s incoming port and check if the website can “see” your open port at your torrent client.

And the ISP (or router) itself isn’t doing anything weird to block torrents, right? In your torrent client if you click any working public torrent, click on the Trackers tab, you should see DHT as working along with whatever open trackers are on the public torrent. In other words you won’t see anything like “waiting” something (I forget the exact message you’ll see when DHT is being blocked but it’ll definitely not be working).

EDIT: Also if it’s a new ISP with new router it might have firewall rules set up that are slowing things down, something to check.

The copy protections on Blu rays are exceptionally annoying, to the extent where there is really only one closed source software – MakeMKV – that can work around them.

Not quite, RedFox formerly SlySoft (RIP) used to market their own Blu-ray ripper and it worked quite well. What it used to do is on-the-fly decryption so you’d run it in the background and could use any other software to read the decrypted Blu-ray (e.g. using Handbrake or whatever). It did also have an option to just rip to a file IIRC. Unfortunately they randomly disappeared so their software is pretty much done. (some background on wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RedFox)

That aside they always a competitor, DVDFab, that still exists today. Their Passkey software is the rough equivalent of what the old RedFox/SlySoft software used to do but they also sell a standalone Blu-ray ripper if that’s more your thing (see https://www.dvdfab.cn/).

But yeah, in some ways you’re stuck with MakeMKV, DVDFab, and maybe some others (?).

I’d have to dig it out but I actually bought a Blu-ray drive a while back that was on the list of drives compatible with these rippers but honestly it’s been a few years since I’ve tried using it. Most times someone else already ripped a Blu-ray I’d be interested in.

Speaking of - If anyone knows offhand, how do people do this stuff on Linux? Does the Linux version of MakeMKV work well for this and/or are there other tools (?)

Wake on LAN is a LAN feature, not WAN, so you’d need to issue that over the local LAN there at the house. You’re going to have a hard time trying to get that working over the WAN (if that’s even possible).

The other comments mentioning a scheduled boot would be a much easier/simple solution if it works for you.

But I’ll throw this in, the super basic least tech solution to this is to open a port forward to the house’s network router. Yes, I know you don’t want to do that, but it’s probably the only network device at that house that’s actually on 24/7 right? And by all means lock it down however you like. My simple method is to open the router login to a non-standard port number, with a IP whitelist, add my own home IP address to that IP whitelist, and bam you now have access to that remote home’s router for just your IP address. Log in remotely, issue a wake on LAN via the router’s own web ui, done.

It’s perfectly reasonable to make this a bit more secure if you wanted but it gets slightly more complicated - open a non-standard port for SSH access to the remote router’s SSH port that only allows SSH login with key. Generate a SSH key and share that key with yourself, then you can log in remotely to that remote house via non-standard SSH port using the SSH key (no user/passwords). From there you’d have to see if you can issue Wake on LAN on the SSH command line, or set up a SSH tunnel from that remote LAN to yours so you can proxy into the router login page and do your Wake on LAN from there. … yes I realize this got complicated :/ But you’ve got a few things to explore given your patience for tinkering with this stuff :)

Of course much of this relies on that house’s router having any of these features to enable and configure. The main takeaway here is that Wake on LAN requires something on 24/7 at that remote LAN for you to enable remote access into and issue a Wake on LAN command within that LAN. How to actually accomplish that is the tricky bit.

That’s fair, I don’t use Tailscale either but was thinking that would affect the WAN side of things rather than the LAN that the phone and Chromecast are on. Looking into it a bit more it sort of seems like OP would need to configure Subnet routing on their Tailscale configuration to enable their Tailscale to forward traffic to devices on the local LAN?

https://tailscale.com/kb/1019/subnets

That was just from some quick searching around but since I don’t use Tailscale I can’t say for sure if that’s a solution (or even if Tailscale is the culprit here).

And yes for sure if OP doesn’t specifically need/want Tailscale then maybe a different remote solution would be something to try like reverse proxy or whatever they decide on.

Yes pretty much, there isn’t really anything extra to configure for casting. I think to get it working

• Both the Google Chromecast and your phone must be connected to the same home network (in other words the same home wifi)
• The TV itself should be on and set to HDMI-1 or whatever port the Chromecast is plugged into
• The Chromecast itself should already be set up, connected to the network, etc. (I’ve never needed to do this but I suspect there’s a few basic steps to get it set up and connected to wifi, etc.)

Do you know if the Chromecast there was accepting other casts from other apps / phones? I wonder if there’s just something configured oddly at that network, or their Chromecast just wasn’t working correctly like maybe it was offline. My Pixel 7 also has a feature to cast the phone screen itself so if your phone can do that it’s something you can test next time you’re able to. (that might just be for Google Pixel phones, other phones might not do screen casting in that way).

I don’t own a Chromecast myself so can’t really think of other things to try, they usually just work if they’re on and online.

Hi. What’s the best way to access my content from a remote location? I’ve got tailscale set up

Are you already able to access your JF content remotely? Wasn’t sure what you meant by saying that you set up tailscale but still asking about accessing content remotely.

If your JF app can already stream your content remotely on your phone, say when you’re out traveling outside your own home, then you already have the ability to cast. Just be sure to have your phone connect to the same network connection that the Google Chromecast is connected to (e.g. that home’s wifi network) then tap the cast icon at the top of the JF app. The Google Chromecast will appear there and you can tap it to start casting whatever you are playing on the JF app to the TV the Chromecast is connected to.

That’s how I do it when traveling to other locations that have a Google Chromecast set up on their TV.

Minor update, I edited my original comment above. The app does seem to work with Jellyfin 10.11.1.

Maybe I’m not the best test candidate LOL… I usually use the Android Jellyfin apps for music so my original test was with a Jellyfin user with only music libraries enabled… Findroid does not like that apparently. Once I logged in with a user with TV/Movie libraries enabled it seems to load and play video.

I don’t normally use that app but I figured I could do a quick test for you - the stable version (0.15.3) does not seem to work on my end. It does connect to the Jellyfin server (10.11.1) but nothing loads after that.

It doesn’t look like findroid has had any stable releases in over a year so it may indeed be showing some incompatibility issues.

EDIT: Re-tested, it does seem to work as long as you have video libraries enabled on the Jellyfin user (e.g. Movies/TV). My earlier test was with a Jellyfin user that only has Music enabled, I did not know Findroid does not play music. (most of my Jellyfin mobile use is for music)

Always good to double check, but yes, I used canyouseeme and the port is definitely open.

That means TCP should be working as expected with the current configuration. Note those port test websites are only testing TCP, not UDP.

A few menu options below the one for port forwarding

I’m not familiar with ProtonVPN configuration so can’t guide you much there, presumably if the port forwarding option only allows for one setting then maybe it’s doing both TCP/UDP? I dunno…

there’s another for configuring the connection as OpenVPN(TCP), OpenVPN(UDP), or Wireguard.

Don’t worry about that one, that’s for configuring the VPN client you will be using to connect to the VPN server. It should not affect the port forward itself unless ProtonVPN is doing something odd.

I’ve had other issues in the past and Transmission’s internal port testing thing

Yeah I wouldn’t rely on that, the internet port test inside the torrent client isn’t always reliable. But in theory it should show up as open all the time if you have a stable open port :/

Could I be missing a step with the trackers?

Doubt it being a tracker issue, they update themselves on their own schedule usually.

I also have a client I’m trying to test uploading to, but it can’t seem to connect to the seedbox

Maybe should have asked this before - can the test torrent client see that there is a seed on the torrent? Or does it load the torrent but just isn’t seeing any seeds or peers at all? The open trackers take a bit to update themselves with a new torrent hash so sometimes it just takes a bit before the torrent client sees a seed and begins downloading from it.

Just to double-check did you already test that the open port is actually open and connectable from the internet? e.g. use any port test website & see if it can connect to your seedbox Transmission open port e.g. https://www.canyouseeme.org/ , https://portchecker.co/ or similar.

Also, not sure how the open port itself was configured but make sure it is open for both TCP and UDP traffic if you needed to specify that during your firewall setup.

There is an Linux compatible open source player being developed called fooyin (https://fooyin.org/) heavily inspired by foobar2000. When I tried it out a few months back it was still a bit rough for day-to-day use but it could eventually become a good alternative for people that miss the foobar2000 style player.

Pretty sure Strawberry does everything you are looking for.

re: #1 I kind of had the same issue but with multiple music folders, most of the default music apps only let you use one folder. Strawberry lets you add as many music folders as you like, I’ve been happy with it.

On Windows I used to use foobar2000 which was great, and in theory I could get it running under Linux, but I’d rather just use something coded for Linux compatibility from the start.

Working fine here, the app connects to the Jellyfin 10.11 server over the internet without issue.

I’d suggest maybe double-check and make sure you still have a port forward from the internet to your Jellyfin server? Usually for me when the app gets stuck trying to connect it’s because it can’t see and connect to the Jellyfin server for some reason. Also in the 10.11.0 release notes they did mention that they removed the ability for the Jellyfin server to auto port forward so it’s possible that affected you? See https://github.com/jellyfin/jellyfin/releases

Other random idea: Maybe somehow the data for your app got messed up? You can reset it and make it start fresh by bringing up its App Info (long-press the Jellyfin Android app), go to Storage & Cache, once there clear the storage and cache. When you re-attempt to launch the Jellyfin app it’ll start fresh and need you to re-enter your Jellyfin server details.

Don’t know if this helps you but did you already try changing Disk IO Type to Simple pread/pwrite (in advanced settings)? It was meant to address some issues with disk read/write + RAM usage. Not something that affected me all that much but could be worth a look.

Was mentioned in the 5.0.1 release notes and in the github pages

https://www.qbittorrent.org/news

https://github.com/qbittorrent/qBittorrent/pull/21300

Beyond that I’d echo the other comment, try to just change settings you actually need to change. Oftentimes people make a whole ton of settings changes in their torrent client and then can’t figure out how to get it back to normal.

https://interviewfor.red/

https://interview.orpheus.network/ (might not be doing interviews right now per the other comment)

Never needed to use this but have seen that tools like https://github.com/fedarovich/qbittorrent-cli are able to export lists of loaded torrents in various formats, it might do what you want.

e.g. if you’re going to load the output in LibreCalc then you probably want to export a list in csv format most likely (the project’s wiki mentions it https://github.com/fedarovich/qbittorrent-cli/wiki/Output-Formats).

so when choosing which content to purge, I want to just sort by Ratio in qBittorrent and start purging anything older than 30 days that isn’t getting uploads. The problem is, more often than not I’m cross seeding the same content across multiple trackers, so although a specific torrent on a specific trackers may be performing poorly, that doesn’t mean the same content isn’t performing well on another tracker.

Something to consider for the future, you could re-work how you are storing your torrent data and hardlink all those cross-seeding torrents in their own folders. So if you do a full delete of one torrent + data it won’t actually affect the torrent + data of other torrents. If you have it split out like that then you could even try to automate the whole process of deleting old torrents with tools like https://github.com/Hundter/qBittorrent-Ratio-Manager or https://github.com/Mythic82/Qbittorrent-auto-delete

On Linux it would be something like

cp -al /home/barnaclebill/mytorrents/trackera/thismovie.2025 /home/barnaclebill/mytorrents/trackerb/

Would hardlink the same torrent data in two places so that torrents for trackera can point to the trackera folder and torrents for trackerb can point to the trackerb folder.

This doesn’t answer your main question but I suspect their thinking is that VPN use is already very common in torrent communities. So common that it’s not really a big deal for users to browse the site via VPN if necessary. It’s not really that the staff there is going to do age verification, realistically if necessary they’d likely just block access from whatever states/jurisdictions are giving them issues with age verification.

That aside not too sure if what you’re looking for currently exists. There are a few general torrent sites that also operate Tor / I2P domains, and also the general torrent indexer Postman exists on I2P. The amount of users in Tor / I2P networks is way lower vs the clearnet torrent sites so a hyper-focused torrent site in Tor / I2P doesn’t seem viable but I could be wrong.