Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.os.linux > #51174 > unrolled thread

personal cloud

Back to article view | Back to alt.os.linux

Contents

  personal cloud Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2018-10-11 17:49 +0200
    Re: personal cloud "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-11 18:55 +0200
    Re: personal cloud "J.O. Aho" <user@example.net> - 2018-10-11 19:01 +0200
    Re: personal cloud Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2018-10-11 19:36 +0200
      Re: personal cloud Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2018-10-11 19:39 +0200
    Re: personal cloud William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2018-10-11 18:56 +0000
      Re: personal cloud "J.O. Aho" <user@example.net> - 2018-10-11 21:57 +0200
        Re: personal cloud William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2018-10-11 20:54 +0000
          Re: personal cloud Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2018-10-12 11:48 +0200
            Re: personal cloud Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2018-10-12 10:40 +0000
              Re: personal cloud Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2018-10-12 13:27 +0200
                Re: personal cloud Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2018-10-12 12:05 +0000
                  Re: personal cloud Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2018-10-12 14:29 +0200
                    Re: personal cloud Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2018-10-12 12:37 +0000
                    Re: personal cloud "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-12 14:43 +0200
                  Re: personal cloud Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2018-10-12 14:59 +0200
              Re: personal cloud Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2018-10-12 13:37 +0200
                Re: personal cloud Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2018-10-12 12:14 +0000
            Re: personal cloud Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2018-10-12 05:46 -0500
              Re: personal cloud Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2018-10-12 13:33 +0200
                Re: personal cloud Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2018-10-12 12:12 +0000
                  Re: personal cloud Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2018-10-12 14:51 +0200
                    Re: personal cloud Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2018-10-12 13:01 +0000
                      Re: personal cloud Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2018-10-12 15:27 +0200
                        Re: personal cloud Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2018-10-12 13:31 +0000
                          Re: personal cloud Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2018-10-12 17:02 +0200
                        Re: personal cloud Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2018-10-12 11:15 -0400
                          Re: personal cloud Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2018-10-13 00:22 +0200
                            Re: personal cloud "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-15 04:23 +0200
                              Re: personal cloud Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2018-10-15 09:58 +0000
                        Re: personal cloud Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2018-10-12 22:50 +0000
                          Re: personal cloud Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2018-10-13 02:06 +0200
                            Re: personal cloud Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2018-10-13 02:08 +0000
                              Re: personal cloud "J.O. Aho" <user@example.net> - 2018-10-13 07:32 +0200
                              Re: personal cloud Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2018-10-13 11:53 +0200
                                Re: personal cloud Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2018-10-13 10:40 +0000
                                  Re: personal cloud Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2018-10-13 15:25 +0200
                        Re: personal cloud "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-15 04:37 +0200
        Re: personal cloud Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2018-10-12 11:37 +0200
      Re: personal cloud Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2018-10-12 11:35 +0200
        Re: personal cloud Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2018-10-12 04:48 -0500
          Re: personal cloud Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2018-10-12 13:06 +0200
            Re: personal cloud "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-12 13:43 +0200
            Re: personal cloud Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2018-10-12 07:29 -0500
            Re: personal cloud Eef Hartman <E.J.M.Hartman@gmail.com> - 2018-10-12 12:58 +0000
              Re: personal cloud Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2018-10-12 16:59 +0200
                Re: personal cloud Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2018-10-12 15:34 +0000
                Re: personal cloud "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-14 14:14 +0200
              Re: personal cloud Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2018-10-12 22:34 +0000
                Re: personal cloud William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2018-10-13 15:03 +0000
                  Re: personal cloud Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2018-10-13 18:50 +0000
          Re: personal cloud Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2018-10-12 14:33 +0200
            Re: personal cloud Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2018-10-12 07:45 -0500
        Re: personal cloud Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2018-10-12 22:24 +0000

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#51174 — personal cloud

does anybody knows a software for creating a personal cloud ?
I mean some server "lite" very easy to configure or 
pre-configured for the task, in order to build a personal 
cloud ?

With "personal cloud" I mean a remote shared disk (or just 
some folders) accessible via web and linux gui clients, in 
other words a sort of "DropBox" but using one's own disk 
storage as cloud depot.

Obviously safe sw (not easily intruded), and able also to 
sub-share parts of the cloud space with other users invited 
or given some credentials.

I'm rather pessimistic about this ... but an attempt to ask 
for is worth while !

Ciao


-- 
1) Resistere, resistere, resistere.
2) Se tutti pagano le tasse, le tasse le pagano tutti
Soviet_Mario - (aka Gatto_Vizzato)

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#51175

On 11/10/2018 17.49, Soviet_Mario wrote:
> does anybody knows a software for creating a personal cloud ?
> I mean some server "lite" very easy to configure or pre-configured for
> the task, in order to build a personal cloud ?
> 
> With "personal cloud" I mean a remote shared disk (or just some folders)
> accessible via web and linux gui clients, in other words a sort of
> "DropBox" but using one's own disk storage as cloud depot.
> 
> Obviously safe sw (not easily intruded), and able also to sub-share
> parts of the cloud space with other users invited or given some
> credentials.
> 
> I'm rather pessimistic about this ... but an attempt to ask for is worth
> while !
> 
> Ciao
> 
> 

ownCloud?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OwnCloud


-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#51176

On 10/11/18 5:49 PM, Soviet_Mario wrote:
> does anybody knows a software for creating a personal cloud ?
> I mean some server "lite" very easy to configure or pre-configured for
> the task, in order to build a personal cloud ?
> 
> With "personal cloud" I mean a remote shared disk (or just some folders)
> accessible via web and linux gui clients, in other words a sort of
> "DropBox" but using one's own disk storage as cloud depot.
> 
> Obviously safe sw (not easily intruded), and able also to sub-share
> parts of the cloud space with other users invited or given some
> credentials.
> 
> I'm rather pessimistic about this ... but an attempt to ask for is worth
> while !

nextCloud

Home Page:  https://nextcloud.com
Wikipedia:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nextcloud


IMHO easier to upgrade to a new version than ownCloud. Both the
nextCloud and ownClound client works as the API is still quite similar.

-- 

 //Aho

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#51180

On 11/10/18 17:49, Soviet_Mario wrote:

for example, what do you think about these two ...

https://nextcloud.com/athome/
https://nextcloud.com/compare/

and

https://owncloud.org/features/

are they difficult to configure for a person without 
experience with servers ?
Do they install a minimal server along with the cloud client ?


> does anybody knows a software for creating a personal cloud ?
> I mean some server "lite" very easy to configure or 
> pre-configured for the task, in order to build a personal 
> cloud ?
> 
> With "personal cloud" I mean a remote shared disk (or just 
> some folders) accessible via web and linux gui clients, in 
> other words a sort of "DropBox" but using one's own disk 
> storage as cloud depot.
> 
> Obviously safe sw (not easily intruded), and able also to 
> sub-share parts of the cloud space with other users invited 
> or given some credentials.
> 
> I'm rather pessimistic about this ... but an attempt to ask 
> for is worth while !
> 
> Ciao
> 
> 


-- 
1) Resistere, resistere, resistere.
2) Se tutti pagano le tasse, le tasse le pagano tutti
Soviet_Mario - (aka Gatto_Vizzato)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#51181

On 11/10/18 19:36, Soviet_Mario wrote:
> On 11/10/18 17:49, Soviet_Mario wrote:
> 
> for example, what do you think about these two ...
> 
> https://nextcloud.com/athome/
> https://nextcloud.com/compare/
> 
> and
> 
> https://owncloud.org/features/

oh, sorry, I met problems in posting and the post was deferred.
I see now you two have replied with the same suggestions ... 
I'm gonna try one of them.

Thanks

> 
> are they difficult to configure for a person without 
> experience with servers ?
> Do they install a minimal server along with the cloud client ?
> 
> 
>> does anybody knows a software for creating a personal cloud ?
>> I mean some server "lite" very easy to configure or 
>> pre-configured for the task, in order to build a personal 
>> cloud ?
>>
>> With "personal cloud" I mean a remote shared disk (or just 
>> some folders) accessible via web and linux gui clients, in 
>> other words a sort of "DropBox" but using one's own disk 
>> storage as cloud depot.
>>
>> Obviously safe sw (not easily intruded), and able also to 
>> sub-share parts of the cloud space with other users 
>> invited or given some credentials.
>>
>> I'm rather pessimistic about this ... but an attempt to 
>> ask for is worth while !
>>
>> Ciao
>>
>>
> 
> 


-- 
1) Resistere, resistere, resistere.
2) Se tutti pagano le tasse, le tasse le pagano tutti
Soviet_Mario - (aka Gatto_Vizzato)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#51184

On 2018-10-11, Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> wrote:
> does anybody knows a software for creating a personal cloud ?
> I mean some server "lite" very easy to configure or 
> pre-configured for the task, in order to build a personal 
> cloud ?
>
> With "personal cloud" I mean a remote shared disk (or just 
> some folders) accessible via web and linux gui clients, in 
> other words a sort of "DropBox" but using one's own disk 
> storage as cloud depot.

Do you mean some disk whose partitions can bee remote mounted by NFS?
Is that similar to what you mean? 
>
> Obviously safe sw (not easily intruded), and able also to 
> sub-share parts of the cloud space with other users invited 
> or given some credentials.

Sounds like NFS to me. 

>
> I'm rather pessimistic about this ... but an attempt to ask 
> for is worth while !
>
> Ciao
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#51186

On 10/11/18 8:56 PM, William Unruh wrote:
> On 2018-10-11, Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> wrote:
>> does anybody knows a software for creating a personal cloud ?
>> I mean some server "lite" very easy to configure or 
>> pre-configured for the task, in order to build a personal 
>> cloud ?
>>
>> With "personal cloud" I mean a remote shared disk (or just 
>> some folders) accessible via web and linux gui clients, in 
>> other words a sort of "DropBox" but using one's own disk 
>> storage as cloud depot.
> 
> Do you mean some disk whose partitions can bee remote mounted by NFS?
> Is that similar to what you mean? 
>>
>> Obviously safe sw (not easily intruded), and able also to 
>> sub-share parts of the cloud space with other users invited 
>> or given some credentials.
> 
> Sounds like NFS to me. 

I have been using NFS since 1990's and I have still not seen an invite
system built into NFS :)

The OP is looking for nextCloud/ownCloud or similar solutions.

-- 

 //Aho

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#51189

On 2018-10-11, J.O. Aho <user@example.net> wrote:
> On 10/11/18 8:56 PM, William Unruh wrote:
>> On 2018-10-11, Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> wrote:
>>> does anybody knows a software for creating a personal cloud ?
>>> I mean some server "lite" very easy to configure or 
>>> pre-configured for the task, in order to build a personal 
>>> cloud ?
>>>
>>> With "personal cloud" I mean a remote shared disk (or just 
>>> some folders) accessible via web and linux gui clients, in 
>>> other words a sort of "DropBox" but using one's own disk 
>>> storage as cloud depot.
>> 
>> Do you mean some disk whose partitions can bee remote mounted by NFS?
>> Is that similar to what you mean? 
>>>
>>> Obviously safe sw (not easily intruded), and able also to 
>>> sub-share parts of the cloud space with other users invited 
>>> or given some credentials.
>> 
>> Sounds like NFS to me. 
>
> I have been using NFS since 1990's and I have still not seen an invite
> system built into NFS :)

As with all Linux/Unix tools, you use many small tools to build a big
system. If you want to invite someone, you can always send them and
email. Besides it sounded to me like he really wanted this for his own
use, not for distributing stuff to a huge crown of people. I guess the
subtext was to try to find out what it was that he really wanted. It
sounded like he had found a "solution" (cloud something or another) to
an ill defined problem he had. Without a clear view of the problem,
finding the best solution is hopeless.

>
> The OP is looking for nextCloud/ownCloud or similar solutions.
O
You know this how? Yes, he talks about "cloud" but that is not problem.
It is a solution. I would like to know what problem it is he wants to
solve first.
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#51198

On 11/10/18 22:54, William Unruh wrote:
> On 2018-10-11, J.O. Aho <user@example.net> wrote:
>> On 10/11/18 8:56 PM, William Unruh wrote:
>>> On 2018-10-11, Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> wrote:
>>>> does anybody knows a software for creating a personal cloud ?
>>>> I mean some server "lite" very easy to configure or
>>>> pre-configured for the task, in order to build a personal
>>>> cloud ?
>>>>
>>>> With "personal cloud" I mean a remote shared disk (or just
>>>> some folders) accessible via web and linux gui clients, in
>>>> other words a sort of "DropBox" but using one's own disk
>>>> storage as cloud depot.
>>>
>>> Do you mean some disk whose partitions can bee remote mounted by NFS?
>>> Is that similar to what you mean?
>>>>
>>>> Obviously safe sw (not easily intruded), and able also to
>>>> sub-share parts of the cloud space with other users invited
>>>> or given some credentials.
>>>
>>> Sounds like NFS to me.
>>
>> I have been using NFS since 1990's and I have still not seen an invite
>> system built into NFS :)
> 
> As with all Linux/Unix tools, you use many small tools to build a big
> system. 

surely true, but a solution not very apt to unskilled person :\

> If you want to invite someone, you can always send them and
> email.

I'd like to share one single link in order for users without 
password to be able to just download files (and reserving to 
myself the ability to load contents and modify them).

> Besides it sounded to me like he really wanted this for his own
> use, not for distributing stuff to a huge crown of people.

I'd be halfway from both :)
I need to share, definitely, but with very small number of 
users (some tens, at worst 100-200 people, and not 
simultaneously)

> I guess the
> subtext was to try to find out what it was that he really wanted. It
> sounded like he had found a "solution" (cloud something or another) to
> an ill defined problem he had. Without a clear view of the problem,
> finding the best solution is hopeless.

I am currently using DropBox, and qualitatively it complies 
with all my needs. The problem is just storage capacity, 
which is low.
I have bulky data (recorded audio-video lessons) that I'd 
like to share with intrested students, that cannot stay on 
the 5 GB cloud (they are 60-80 GB of data, on some disks of 
mine).
I'd like to share SAFELY part of my storage data
* keeping the machine powered on
* regardless of dynamically assigned IP (real-time syncing 
more or less, but better than real-time, automatic 
reconnection on IP change if line drops and the provider 
reassign a different IP)
* controlling privileges of access on the DATA : myself = 
total control, users who just have the shared link, only 
download (no change on my storage allowed). I mean, I don't 
need sort of GIT or google docs for many authors to modify 
shared docs. Just read-only guests.

> 
>>
>> The OP is looking for nextCloud/ownCloud or similar solutions.
> O
> You know this how? Yes, he talks about "cloud" but that is not problem.

but It is my actual solution, and it's good except from 
insufficient storage. That's why I'd like to directly share 
part of my HDD's space. But SAFELY !!!

> It is a solution. I would like to know what problem it is he wants to
> solve first.

I tried to clarify the point. Share, in read only mode, 
"huge" amount of data. And free of charge :)
I'm not s'posed to pay for keeping and sharing my data :)

>>


-- 
1) Resistere, resistere, resistere.
2) Se tutti pagano le tasse, le tasse le pagano tutti
Soviet_Mario - (aka Gatto_Vizzato)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#51200

Soviet_Mario wrote:
> On 11/10/18 22:54, William Unruh wrote:
>> [...]
>> As with all Linux/Unix tools, you use many small tools to build a big
>> system. 
>
> surely true, but a solution not very apt to unskilled person :\

And setting up {own,next}cloud, and keeping up with security, and all
that jazz is?

I mean, don't get me wrong, it's probably a weekend or two's worth of
work, but not exactly hard.

>
>> If you want to invite someone, you can always send them and
>> email.
>
> I'd like to share one single link in order for users without 
> password to be able to just download files (and reserving to 
> myself the ability to load contents and modify them).

Just run static html then.  Sure, it's not as "pretty", but if it's just
to "let the public grab files(tm)", you don't exactly need "pretty".

For example, my site (http://www.djph.net) does exactly this.  I can
also send direct links to things:
http://www.djph.net/linuxstuff/minthelp/minthelp.tgz

(here's hoping I didn't typo it :) )

Sure, changes to the content are slightly more involved than "point, and
drool", but ... 

(1) put content in ${www_root}/path/to/thing
(2) update ${www_root}/index.html and add <a href="link_here">text</a>
    to create the link on the homepage.

> [...]
> I am currently using DropBox, and qualitatively it complies 
> with all my needs. The problem is just storage capacity, 
> which is low.
> I have bulky data (recorded audio-video lessons) that I'd 
> like to share with intrested students, that cannot stay on 
> the 5 GB cloud (they are 60-80 GB of data, on some disks of 
> mine).

Uh, sounds like you're looking for "youtube".  I hear they're great for
sharing videos.

> I'd like to share SAFELY part of my storage data
> * keeping the machine powered on

UPS, or better yet a generator (note, will not save you from ISP losing
power though ;) )

> * regardless of dynamically assigned IP (real-time syncing 
> more or less, but better than real-time, automatic 
> reconnection on IP change if line drops and the provider 
> reassign a different IP)

Dynamic DNS setup, with auto-updates.  See providers such as dyndns.com,
no-ip.com, etc.

> * controlling privileges of access on the DATA : myself = 
> total control, users who just have the shared link, only 
> download (no change on my storage allowed). I mean, I don't 
> need sort of GIT or google docs for many authors to modify 
> shared docs. Just read-only guests.

Again, static html.  Although that is slightly more of a pain for video
(but it's not exactly an 'unsolved problem').


-- 
|_|O|_| Registered Linux user #585947
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5  4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#51203

On 12/10/18 12:40, Dan Purgert wrote:
> Soviet_Mario wrote:
>> On 11/10/18 22:54, William Unruh wrote:
>>> [...]
>>> As with all Linux/Unix tools, you use many small tools to build a big
>>> system.
>>
>> surely true, but a solution not very apt to unskilled person :\
> 
> And setting up {own,next}cloud, and keeping up with security, and all
> that jazz is?

I have not tried yet so I can't tell to which extent this 
software lets me delegate details ...

> 
> I mean, don't get me wrong, it's probably a weekend or two's worth of
> work, but not exactly hard.
> 
>>
>>> If you want to invite someone, you can always send them and
>>> email.
>>
>> I'd like to share one single link in order for users without
>> password to be able to just download files (and reserving to
>> myself the ability to load contents and modify them).
> 
> Just run static html then.  Sure, it's not as "pretty", but if it's just
> to "let the public grab files(tm)", you don't exactly need "pretty".
> 

independently I was getting to think that what I might also 
need would be a SELF-HOSTED  FTP service (I don't know any 
details about this).
Provided an abstraction layer, able to translate statical 
"literal" names (typed urls in nav. bar) into dynamically 
mutable IP, exist, and that is free of charge.

Do you happen to know some such service ?

I'm quite sure I have read sth similar time ago, but I cant 
recall the thread (not even the NG) ...

> For example, my site (http://www.djph.net) does exactly this.  I can
> also send direct links to things:
> http://www.djph.net/linuxstuff/minthelp/minthelp.tgz
> 
> (here's hoping I didn't typo it :) )
> 
> Sure, changes to the content are slightly more involved than "point, and
> drool", but ...

and if one choosed FTP service, any change in the underlying 
folder would not be automatically synced for remote users 
who simply reload the page ?

I say this as I use very long and descriptive filenames, so 
sharing them via FTP would be absolutely sufficient for my 
needs ...

As long as FTP supports some different restrictions for who 
are allowed to upload and simply download, and also some 
restrictions in SCOPE (i.g. sharing just some folders and 
not necessarily an entire partition).

Is it there a friendly way to build an FTP service ?

> 
> (1) put content in ${www_root}/path/to/thing
> (2) update ${www_root}/index.html and add <a href="link_here">text</a>
>      to create the link on the homepage.


not a bad idea !!
What do you think about FTP ?
are there ways to restrict browsing areas for unprivileged 
users ?

> 
>> [...]
>> I am currently using DropBox, and qualitatively it complies
>> with all my needs. The problem is just storage capacity,
>> which is low.
>> I have bulky data (recorded audio-video lessons) that I'd
>> like to share with intrested students, that cannot stay on
>> the 5 GB cloud (they are 60-80 GB of data, on some disks of
>> mine).
> 
> Uh, sounds like you're looking for "youtube".  I hear they're great for
> sharing videos.

yes .... but no.
I mean, I am just a you tube user, and all the videos are 
just there on my channel, but were made unusable.

I was used to upload thinks many at a time.
I had used very carefull denomination rules for filenames 
(class, section, date, topics in a certain details) but I 
realized later that the FUCKING you tube made a very very 
nasty things (without no understandable reason) : it WIPED 
OUT every filename with no notice.
The information got lost and I have no mean to rebuild it 
later. No practical mean I mean : It would be necessary to 
watch the ones online and the ones on HD storage and to 
compare them to establish who is who and MANUALLY rename 
them again. Impracticable.
I leave the files there but I won't upload anymore. 
PArticularly I won't upload one at a time, renaminga manually.
It's a long task. I DEMAND it to be done unattended. Upload 
a folder and go away letting it slowly work. If it wipes out 
the filenames for misterious reasons, the service is not 
suitable for my usage.

> 
>> I'd like to share SAFELY part of my storage data
>> * keeping the machine powered on
> 
> UPS, or better yet a generator (note, will not save you from ISP losing
> power though ;) )

I don't need such high degree of reliability. If some time 
the server is down, no problem at all.

> 
>> * regardless of dynamically assigned IP (real-time syncing
>> more or less, but better than real-time, automatic
>> reconnection on IP change if line drops and the provider
>> reassign a different IP)
> 
> Dynamic DNS setup, with auto-updates.  See providers such as dyndns.com,
> no-ip.com, etc.

but these services, also work with self-hosted servers ?

> 
>> * controlling privileges of access on the DATA : myself =
>> total control, users who just have the shared link, only
>> download (no change on my storage allowed). I mean, I don't
>> need sort of GIT or google docs for many authors to modify
>> shared docs. Just read-only guests.
> 
> Again, static html.  Although that is slightly more of a pain for video
> (but it's not exactly an 'unsolved problem').

mmm ... I'd prefer FTP like service.
Tell me your opinion about that. It's conceptually similar 
in the kind of activity it supports.

I'd need free download and controlled upload from remote 
(and total control from home where I work on storage 
folders) ...

BTW : in case I used a 3rd party SW like the clouds 
recommended (next cloud or own cloud) maybe I'd have to 
compell my users to install the client ... I did not think 
about this before, but NOW I realize it would be a huge 
problem. I am clumsy with networks, but my students are far 
more than myself. Moreover I'd have to chose a client 
WINDOWS, ANDROID friendly and LINUX friendly as well.
I use only linux now, but the students use just Android (on 
smartphones) and Windows at home.

A client to be installed locally would have to support any 
to be useful


The solution of static html (maybe also FTP) would avoid all 
of these restrictions and require no install at all.

Is FTP supported on smartphones ? I don't have one ... I 
can't tell it.



> 
> 


-- 
1) Resistere, resistere, resistere.
2) Se tutti pagano le tasse, le tasse le pagano tutti
Soviet_Mario - (aka Gatto_Vizzato)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#51207

Soviet_Mario wrote:
> On 12/10/18 12:40, Dan Purgert wrote:
>> Soviet_Mario wrote:
>>> On 11/10/18 22:54, William Unruh wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>> As with all Linux/Unix tools, you use many small tools to build a big
>>>> system.
>>>
>>> surely true, but a solution not very apt to unskilled person :\
>> 
>> And setting up {own,next}cloud, and keeping up with security, and all
>> that jazz is?
>
> I have not tried yet so I can't tell to which extent this 
> software lets me delegate details ...

"Details" of what?  You (the "unskilled person") still have to set it
up.

>>>> If you want to invite someone, you can always send them and
>>>> email.
>>>
>>> I'd like to share one single link in order for users without
>>> password to be able to just download files (and reserving to
>>> myself the ability to load contents and modify them).
>> 
>> Just run static html then.  Sure, it's not as "pretty", but if it's just
>> to "let the public grab files(tm)", you don't exactly need "pretty".
>> 
>
> independently I was getting to think that what I might also 
> need would be a SELF-HOSTED  FTP service (I don't know any 
> details about this).

FTP would work too, but I find apache easier to setup than vsftpd.

> Provided an abstraction layer, able to translate statical 
> "literal" names (typed urls in nav. bar) into dynamically 
> mutable IP, exist, and that is free of charge.

You just described (dynamic) DNS.  Note that it's not *free* though
(unless you're okay using silly domain names, such as
"soviet-mario.isanerd.net").

But also, $20 for a year isn't exactly expensive.

> [...]
> and if one choosed FTP service, any change in the underlying 
> folder would not be automatically synced for remote users 
> who simply reload the page ?

Remote users would need to refresh the page after you update it.  That
is, if you had a page with

 - file1
 - file2
 - file3

and while I'm looking at the page, you happen to add

 - file4

I won't see "file4" until I refresh the page.

> As long as FTP supports some different restrictions for who 
> are allowed to upload and simply download, and also some 
> restrictions in SCOPE (i.g. sharing just some folders and 
> not necessarily an entire partition).

It does, but it's more geared towards "upload and download" - which is
why I suggested http for the transfers -- that's generally "one way" for
the client (that is, when you go to a website, you can't also upload to
it).

> [...]
> What do you think about FTP ?
> are there ways to restrict browsing areas for unprivileged 
> users ?

FTP would also be usable, but I prefer http for most cases.

>> [...]
>>> * regardless of dynamically assigned IP (real-time syncing
>>> more or less, but better than real-time, automatic
>>> reconnection on IP change if line drops and the provider
>>> reassign a different IP)
>> 
>> Dynamic DNS setup, with auto-updates.  See providers such as dyndns.com,
>> no-ip.com, etc.
>
> but these services, also work with self-hosted servers ?

Of course.  That's kind of their purpose.
>
>> 
>>> * controlling privileges of access on the DATA : myself =
>>> total control, users who just have the shared link, only
>>> download (no change on my storage allowed). I mean, I don't
>>> need sort of GIT or google docs for many authors to modify
>>> shared docs. Just read-only guests.
>> 
>> Again, static html.  Although that is slightly more of a pain for video
>> (but it's not exactly an 'unsolved problem').
>
> mmm ... I'd prefer FTP like service.
> Tell me your opinion about that. It's conceptually similar 
> in the kind of activity it supports.

So then instead of you static html file linking to each thing you want
to share, link to a directory with no "index.html".  Users will see the
directory listing, and be able to select what they want to download.

For example: http://www.djph.net/linuxstuff


-- 
|_|O|_| Registered Linux user #585947
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5  4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#51210

On 12/10/18 14:05, Dan Purgert wrote:
> Soviet_Mario wrote:
>> On 12/10/18 12:40, Dan Purgert wrote:
>>> Soviet_Mario wrote:
>>>> On 11/10/18 22:54, William Unruh wrote:
>>>>> [...]
>>>>> As with all Linux/Unix tools, you use many small tools to build a big
>>>>> system.
>>>>
>>>> surely true, but a solution not very apt to unskilled person :\
>>>
>>> And setting up {own,next}cloud, and keeping up with security, and all
>>> that jazz is?
>>
>> I have not tried yet so I can't tell to which extent this
>> software lets me delegate details ...
> 
> "Details" of what?  You (the "unskilled person") still have to set it
> up.
> 
>>>>> If you want to invite someone, you can always send them and
>>>>> email.
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to share one single link in order for users without
>>>> password to be able to just download files (and reserving to
>>>> myself the ability to load contents and modify them).
>>>
>>> Just run static html then.  Sure, it's not as "pretty", but if it's just
>>> to "let the public grab files(tm)", you don't exactly need "pretty".
>>>
>>
>> independently I was getting to think that what I might also
>> need would be a SELF-HOSTED  FTP service (I don't know any
>> details about this).
> 
> FTP would work too, but I find apache easier to setup than vsftpd.
> 
>> Provided an abstraction layer, able to translate statical
>> "literal" names (typed urls in nav. bar) into dynamically
>> mutable IP, exist, and that is free of charge.
> 
> You just described (dynamic) DNS.  Note that it's not *free* though
> (unless you're okay using silly domain names, such as
> "soviet-mario.isanerd.net").
> 
> But also, $20 for a year isn't exactly expensive.
> 
>> [...]
>> and if one choosed FTP service, any change in the underlying
>> folder would not be automatically synced for remote users
>> who simply reload the page ?
> 
> Remote users would need to refresh the page after you update it.  That
> is, if you had a page with
> 
>   - file1
>   - file2
>   - file3
> 
> and while I'm looking at the page, you happen to add
> 
>   - file4
> 
> I won't see "file4" until I refresh the page.
> 
>> As long as FTP supports some different restrictions for who
>> are allowed to upload and simply download, and also some
>> restrictions in SCOPE (i.g. sharing just some folders and
>> not necessarily an entire partition).
> 
> It does, but it's more geared towards "upload and download" - which is
> why I suggested http for the transfers -- that's generally "one way" for
> the client (that is, when you go to a website, you can't also upload to
> it).


got the point

but I was thinking about the (possibly, Im not sure) simpler 
syncing of the contents (just the refresh, everything is 
delegated to the folder browsing of the browser) without 
having to manually write a line of HTML code.
I'd just have to well structure the folder hierarchies of 
the contents, uniformly naming them and so.

> 
>> [...]
>> What do you think about FTP ?
>> are there ways to restrict browsing areas for unprivileged
>> users ?
> 
> FTP would also be usable, but I prefer http for most cases.

I'm considering that. I'd like to find a tool to indexing 
files and folders and translating them to hyperlinks and 
output a plain HTML page.

> 
>>> [...]
>>>> * regardless of dynamically assigned IP (real-time syncing
>>>> more or less, but better than real-time, automatic
>>>> reconnection on IP change if line drops and the provider
>>>> reassign a different IP)
>>>
>>> Dynamic DNS setup, with auto-updates.  See providers such as dyndns.com,
>>> no-ip.com, etc.
>>
>> but these services, also work with self-hosted servers ?
> 
> Of course.  That's kind of their purpose.

very good.
I'm reading now : No-IP seems to be free of charge too !

>>
>>>
>>>> * controlling privileges of access on the DATA : myself =
>>>> total control, users who just have the shared link, only
>>>> download (no change on my storage allowed). I mean, I don't
>>>> need sort of GIT or google docs for many authors to modify
>>>> shared docs. Just read-only guests.
>>>
>>> Again, static html.  Although that is slightly more of a pain for video
>>> (but it's not exactly an 'unsolved problem').

why ? I'd like people to just download media, not to watch 
them within my page, frames or else ... EVERY link should be 
a download link or controlled nav.link

>>
>> mmm ... I'd prefer FTP like service.
>> Tell me your opinion about that. It's conceptually similar
>> in the kind of activity it supports.
> 
> So then instead of you static html file linking to each thing you want
> to share, link to a directory with no "index.html".  Users will see the
> directory listing, and be able to select what they want to download.

mmm .... I'll have a look to the sw you cited

> 
> For example: http://www.djph.net/linuxstuff

ah so it WAS FTP afrer all, not just seeming FTP :)


sorry I messed up with replies. The system crashed with two 
drafts partially saved. I apologize for double overlapped answer

> 
> 


-- 
1) Resistere, resistere, resistere.
2) Se tutti pagano le tasse, le tasse le pagano tutti
Soviet_Mario - (aka Gatto_Vizzato)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#51213

Soviet_Mario wrote:
> On 12/10/18 14:05, Dan Purgert wrote:
> [...]
> I'm reading now : No-IP seems to be free of charge too !

If you're okay with certain (silly) domain names.

> [..]
>> 
>> For example: http://www.djph.net/linuxstuff
>
> ah so it WAS FTP afrer all, not just seeming FTP :)

NO.  It's *not* FTP, in any way shape or form.  It is HTTP.


-- 
|_|O|_| Registered Linux user #585947
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5  4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#51214

On 12/10/2018 14.29, Soviet_Mario wrote:
> On 12/10/18 14:05, Dan Purgert wrote:
>> Soviet_Mario wrote:
>>> On 12/10/18 12:40, Dan Purgert wrote:
>>>> Soviet_Mario wrote:
>>>>> On 11/10/18 22:54, William Unruh wrote:
>>>>>> [...]

...

>>> Provided an abstraction layer, able to translate statical
>>> "literal" names (typed urls in nav. bar) into dynamically
>>> mutable IP, exist, and that is free of charge.
>>
>> You just described (dynamic) DNS.  Note that it's not *free* though
>> (unless you're okay using silly domain names, such as
>> "soviet-mario.isanerd.net").
>>
>> But also, $20 for a year isn't exactly expensive.
>>
>>> [...]
>>> and if one choosed FTP service, any change in the underlying
>>> folder would not be automatically synced for remote users
>>> who simply reload the page ?
>>
>> Remote users would need to refresh the page after you update it.  That
>> is, if you had a page with
>>
>>   - file1
>>   - file2
>>   - file3
>>
>> and while I'm looking at the page, you happen to add
>>
>>   - file4
>>
>> I won't see "file4" until I refresh the page.
>>
>>> As long as FTP supports some different restrictions for who
>>> are allowed to upload and simply download, and also some
>>> restrictions in SCOPE (i.g. sharing just some folders and
>>> not necessarily an entire partition).
>>
>> It does, but it's more geared towards "upload and download" - which is
>> why I suggested http for the transfers -- that's generally "one way" for
>> the client (that is, when you go to a website, you can't also upload to
>> it).
> 
> 
> got the point
> 
> but I was thinking about the (possibly, Im not sure) simpler syncing of
> the contents (just the refresh, everything is delegated to the folder
> browsing of the browser) without having to manually write a line of HTML
> code.
> I'd just have to well structure the folder hierarchies of the contents,
> uniformly naming them and so.

Yes, Apache has a module for directory serving. The index is created
dynamically.


>>>>> * controlling privileges of access on the DATA : myself =
>>>>> total control, users who just have the shared link, only
>>>>> download (no change on my storage allowed). I mean, I don't
>>>>> need sort of GIT or google docs for many authors to modify
>>>>> shared docs. Just read-only guests.
>>>>
>>>> Again, static html.  Although that is slightly more of a pain for video
>>>> (but it's not exactly an 'unsolved problem').
> 
> why ? I'd like people to just download media, not to watch them within
> my page, frames or else ... EVERY link should be a download link or
> controlled nav.link

The client can watch the video without downloading it in full first, or
download it. That his choice.

However, you need more bandwidth than a crappy ADSL.



> 
>>>
>>> mmm ... I'd prefer FTP like service.
>>> Tell me your opinion about that. It's conceptually similar
>>> in the kind of activity it supports.
>>
>> So then instead of you static html file linking to each thing you want
>> to share, link to a directory with no "index.html".  Users will see the
>> directory listing, and be able to select what they want to download.
> 
> mmm .... I'll have a look to the sw you cited
> 
>>
>> For example: http://www.djph.net/linuxstuff
> 
> ah so it WAS FTP afrer all, not just seeming FTP :)

No, that's http. It is actually what I was talking about above.



-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#51218

On 12/10/18 14:05, Dan Purgert wrote:
> Soviet_Mario wrote:
>> On 12/10/18 12:40, Dan Purgert wrote:
>>> Soviet_Mario wrote:
>>>> On 11/10/18 22:54, William Unruh wrote:
>>>>> [...]
>>>>> As with all Linux/Unix tools, you use many small tools to build a big
>>>>> system.
>>>>
>>>> surely true, but a solution not very apt to unskilled person :\
>>>
>>> And setting up {own,next}cloud, and keeping up with security, and all
>>> that jazz is?
>>
>> I have not tried yet so I can't tell to which extent this
>> software lets me delegate details ...
> 
> "Details" of what? 

well, keeping up with security "manually" I meant. I hoped 
the SW would do the dirty work for me :)

> You (the "unskilled person") still have to set it
> up.

to some extent It would be acceptable

> 
>>>>> If you want to invite someone, you can always send them and
>>>>> email.
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to share one single link in order for users without
>>>> password to be able to just download files (and reserving to
>>>> myself the ability to load contents and modify them).
>>>
>>> Just run static html then.  Sure, it's not as "pretty", but if it's just
>>> to "let the public grab files(tm)", you don't exactly need "pretty".
>>>
>>
>> independently I was getting to think that what I might also
>> need would be a SELF-HOSTED  FTP service (I don't know any
>> details about this).
> 
> FTP would work too, but I find apache easier to setup than vsftpd.

uhm ... If you find it complicate to setup vsftpd, than it's 
not likely to suit me too

> 
>> Provided an abstraction layer, able to translate statical
>> "literal" names (typed urls in nav. bar) into dynamically
>> mutable IP, exist, and that is free of charge.
> 
> You just described (dynamic) DNS.  Note that it's not *free* though
> (unless you're okay using silly domain names, such as
> "soviet-mario.isanerd.net").

I'd accept ANY name. It's not a brand, I have to sell 
nothing to anyone :)



> 
> But also, $20 for a year isn't exactly expensive.
> 
>> [...]
>> and if one choosed FTP service, any change in the underlying
>> folder would not be automatically synced for remote users
>> who simply reload the page ?
> 
> Remote users would need to refresh the page after you update it.  That
> is, if you had a page with
> 
>   - file1
>   - file2
>   - file3
> 
> and while I'm looking at the page, you happen to add
> 
>   - file4
> 
> I won't see "file4" until I refresh the page.
> 
>> As long as FTP supports some different restrictions for who
>> are allowed to upload and simply download, and also some
>> restrictions in SCOPE (i.g. sharing just some folders and
>> not necessarily an entire partition).
> 
> It does, but it's more geared towards "upload and download" - which is
> why I suggested http for the transfers -- that's generally "one way" for
> the client (that is, when you go to a website, you can't also upload to
> it).
> 
>> [...]
>> What do you think about FTP ?
>> are there ways to restrict browsing areas for unprivileged
>> users ?
> 
> FTP would also be usable, but I prefer http for most cases.
> 
>>> [...]
>>>> * regardless of dynamically assigned IP (real-time syncing
>>>> more or less, but better than real-time, automatic
>>>> reconnection on IP change if line drops and the provider
>>>> reassign a different IP)
>>>
>>> Dynamic DNS setup, with auto-updates.  See providers such as dyndns.com,
>>> no-ip.com, etc.
>>
>> but these services, also work with self-hosted servers ?
> 
> Of course.  That's kind of their purpose.
>>
>>>
>>>> * controlling privileges of access on the DATA : myself =
>>>> total control, users who just have the shared link, only
>>>> download (no change on my storage allowed). I mean, I don't
>>>> need sort of GIT or google docs for many authors to modify
>>>> shared docs. Just read-only guests.
>>>
>>> Again, static html.  Although that is slightly more of a pain for video
>>> (but it's not exactly an 'unsolved problem').
>>
>> mmm ... I'd prefer FTP like service.
>> Tell me your opinion about that. It's conceptually similar
>> in the kind of activity it supports.
> 
> So then instead of you static html file linking to each thing you want
> to share, link to a directory with no "index.html".  Users will see the
> directory listing, and be able to select what they want to download.
> 
> For example: http://www.djph.net/linuxstuff
> 

sorry I messed up with replies. The system crashed with two 
drafts partially saved. I apologize for double overlapped answer

> 


-- 
1) Resistere, resistere, resistere.
2) Se tutti pagano le tasse, le tasse le pagano tutti
Soviet_Mario - (aka Gatto_Vizzato)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#51205

On 12/10/18 12:40, Dan Purgert wrote:
> Soviet_Mario wrote:
>> On 11/10/18 22:54, William Unruh wrote:
>>> [...]
>>> As with all Linux/Unix tools, you use many small tools to build a big
>>> system.
>>
>> surely true, but a solution not very apt to unskilled person :\
> 
> And setting up {own,next}cloud, and keeping up with security, and all
> that jazz is?
> 
> I mean, don't get me wrong, it's probably a weekend or two's worth of
> work, but not exactly hard.
> 
>>
>>> If you want to invite someone, you can always send them and
>>> email.
>>
>> I'd like to share one single link in order for users without
>> password to be able to just download files (and reserving to
>> myself the ability to load contents and modify them).
> 
> Just run static html then.  Sure, it's not as "pretty", but if it's just
> to "let the public grab files(tm)", you don't exactly need "pretty".
> 
> For example, my site (http://www.djph.net) does exactly this.  I can
> also send direct links to things:
> http://www.djph.net/linuxstuff/minthelp/minthelp.tgz
> 
> (here's hoping I didn't typo it :) )
In some sub-section it actually SEEMS like FTP !
Is it ?

another question : are you self-hosted or on some provider ?
If the former, do you rely on the IP translation services 
you recommended or have a static IP contract ?

CUT
-- 
1) Resistere, resistere, resistere.
2) Se tutti pagano le tasse, le tasse le pagano tutti
Soviet_Mario - (aka Gatto_Vizzato)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#51209

Soviet_Mario wrote:
> [...]
> In some sub-section it actually SEEMS like FTP !
> Is it ?

No, it's all HTTP / HTML.

>
> another question : are you self-hosted or on some provider ?

Yes, I run everything locally.

> If the former, do you rely on the IP translation services 
> you recommended or have a static IP contract ?

Yes, I'm using DNS through no-ip (although I've also had the same IP for
2 years now).


-- 
|_|O|_| Registered Linux user #585947
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5  4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#51201

On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 11:48:13 +0200, Soviet_Mario wrote:
>
> I'd be halfway from both :)
> I need to share, definitely, but with very small number of 
> users (some tens, at worst 100-200 people, and not 
> simultaneously)

You might want to check your upload speed:
      https://www.speakeasy.net/speedtest/
or    http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#51204

On 12/10/18 12:46, Bit Twister wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 11:48:13 +0200, Soviet_Mario wrote:
>>
>> I'd be halfway from both :)
>> I need to share, definitely, but with very small number of
>> users (some tens, at worst 100-200 people, and not
>> simultaneously)
> 
> You might want to check your upload speed:
>        https://www.speakeasy.net/speedtest/
> or    http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest
> 

nice service !
I got this results :
download : 2,76 Mbits/s
upload : 492,3 kBits/s

very modest in their stats (I don't have optical fibre, 
still relying on copper)

but I have been misleading.
100-200 people is the number of the students in the courses, 
not the number of users connected. It would be very unusual 
to have just more than 2-3 of them connected at the same 
time i reckon ....

-- 
1) Resistere, resistere, resistere.
2) Se tutti pagano le tasse, le tasse le pagano tutti
Soviet_Mario - (aka Gatto_Vizzato)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.os.linux

csiph-web