I want to be able to power-cycle my loft based PC ... anyone know of a
good reliable remote control plug ?

John Weston wrote:
In article e6eadc27-578e-4581-aa98-f934942e60fb@
26g2000hsk.googlegroups.com, says...
I want to be able to power-cycle my loft based PC ... anyone know of a
good reliable remote control plug ?

http://www.byebyestandby.co.uk/
These work in a similar application for me, but the multi-button types
are easy to press the wrong button, so maybe not the best solution for
a server? They do a single button type and a wall switch that van be
set to a unique channel.


That is one of the functions I use my Domia Lite for (same as ByeBye
Standby so far as I can tell). The remote has four pairs of buttons and
a selector slider. With the selector in position 1, I control three
lights and TV (TV itself and cable box). In position 2, it controls a
remote PC (and associated equipment) and the printer. So long as I leave
the remote in position 1, all is well!

Mind, I have never needed to use the remote to switch off the PC - I
have always found that a remote reboot has worked. But it does allow me
to switch it off when it is not needed.

--
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
www.thyromind.info www.thyroiduk.org www.altsupportthyroid.org

Jethro wrote:
I want to be able to power-cycle my loft based PC ... anyone know of a
good reliable remote control plug ?

Bit of cat 5 , a switch and a remote 12v coil, Mains contact RELAY?


Or wire a LV relay across the reset switch?

"Jethro" wrote in message
...
I want to be able to power-cycle my loft based PC ... anyone know of a
good reliable remote control plug ?

I brought a set 3 sockets+remote from B&Q for £20.
Seems to work fine I have one socket in the loft and as it works
ultrasonically
raqther than infa red it goes through the ceiling OK.

They also do single units and dimmer sockets too for remote controlling.

On 29 Sep, 12:53, Owain wrote:
Jethro wrote:
I want to be able to power-cycle my loft based PC ... anyone know of a
good reliable remote control plug ?

Put a 30A shower pullcord switch on the ceiling in the room below? ;-)

:-)

On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 12:56:58 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Jethro wrote:
I want to be able to power-cycle my loft based PC ... anyone know of a
good reliable remote control plug ?

Bit of cat 5 , a switch and a remote 12v coil, Mains contact RELAY?

.... and a battery (or 12V psu).

--
Frank Erskine

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
news:gbqi77$4lf$1@qmul...

"Jethro" wrote in message
...
I want to be able to power-cycle my loft based PC ... anyone know of a
good reliable remote control plug ?

I brought a set 3 sockets+remote from B&Q for £20.
Seems to work fine I have one socket in the loft and as it works
ultrasonically
raqther than infa red it goes through the ceiling OK.

They are RF not ultrasonic.

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
Jethro wrote:

I want to be able to power-cycle my loft based PC ... anyone know of a
good reliable remote control plug ?

Maplin are doing a set of 4 for £25 at the moment -
http://www.maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?...-6&T=-11755906

I have some similar ones (not the same make, but the same principle) which
work ok - including through ceilings. [I have an outside light which is fed
from a socket in a bedroom, and I can turn it on and off from the lounge
below, using the remote control].

The problem you're likely to have with these things is that there's no
feedback - so unless you can actually *see* the effect of turning something
on and off (like I can with my outside light), you can't be 100% sure that
it's actually *done* it. Although the ones I've got work pretty well, I
occasionally have to press the button more than once to get them to operate
when the socket is hidden behind furniture.
--
Cheers,
Roger
______
Email address maintained for newsgroup use only, and not regularly
monitored.. Messages sent to it may not be read for several weeks.
PLEASE REPLY TO NEWSGROUP!

In article ,
Jethro writes:
I want to be able to power-cycle my loft based PC ... anyone know of a
good reliable remote control plug ?

What about just extending the front panel power and reset
push-button switches to a parallel set in the room below?
They are just low voltage signals, not mains level switching
(assuming an ATX or later PC, i.e. a Pentium or later).

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

In article ,
(Andrew Gabriel) writes:
In article ,
Jethro writes:
I want to be able to power-cycle my loft based PC ... anyone know of a
good reliable remote control plug ?

What about just extending the front panel power and reset
push-button switches to a parallel set in the room below?
They are just low voltage signals, not mains level switching
(assuming an ATX or later PC, i.e. a Pentium or later).

Another thing -- my loft gets up to just shy of 50C when the
Sun shines on it in the middle of summer. That's well over
what I would be comfortable running a PC at. (I do have some
low power microcontroller based electronics in the loft, but
that doesn't generate enough power to get hotter than the
ambient temperature, which is OK. I do also have a fan to
keep the loft cool, but it doesn't make much of a dent in
the kW's the sun pumps into it.)

I have thought about running a PC in the loft. If I did, I'd
either build a box which was cooled by drawing cooler air
from the rooms below or outdoor north side, or I'd work out
how to duct such air directly into the PC case. Another
option would be to fit much more powerful fans (noise
doesn't matter much up there), but 50C is pushing it even
for this -- I keep my server disks running at about 34C,
and at over 50C, their average life would only be a fraction
of that at 34C.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

Frank Erskine wrote:
On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 12:56:58 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Jethro wrote:
I want to be able to power-cycle my loft based PC ... anyone know of a
good reliable remote control plug ?
Bit of cat 5 , a switch and a remote 12v coil, Mains contact RELAY?

... and a battery (or 12V psu).

Run it off a USB port on a nearby computer.

"Andrew Gabriel" wrote in message
...

Another thing -- my loft gets up to just shy of 50C when the
Sun shines on it in the middle of summer. That's well over
what I would be comfortable running a PC at.

We put a couple of pc's in the loft of our parents house about 7 years ago,
bog standard pc's with just one mod of a 90mm thermostaticaly controlled
case fan in each one,

they say on a board accross the joists about a foot from the roof, were put
there as there was a cupboard in my bedroom below, where i fed it with power
through the celing, and extended the front panel buttons to a little panel
in the cupboard to reset it when needed.

They are still up there working as a server and adsl splitter to this day,
(was installed before the easy availability of multi port adsl hubs and all
that lot, origionaly split a 56k modem connection around the 7 pooters in
the house.

we expected them not to last long due to the wild temperature variations,
but they have lasted fine, when ever a hard disk size increase was needed we
just added another disk, got about 5 in the server machine now and i think
we retired the earliest ones as they were suck small capacity (were massive
when we bought them of course)

On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 03:10:19 -0700 (PDT), Jethro wrote:

I want to be able to power-cycle my loft based PC ... anyone know of a
good reliable remote control plug ?

Power cycling a Windows PC via the mains power input isn't to be
recommended, because it can lead to disk corruption. You're supposed to
shut it down (or restart it) gracefully from within Windows.

Gotde T Shirt wrote:
On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 03:10:19 -0700 (PDT), Jethro wrote:

I want to be able to power-cycle my loft based PC ... anyone know of a
good reliable remote control plug ?

Power cycling a Windows PC via the mains power input isn't to be
recommended, because it can lead to disk corruption. You're supposed to
shut it down (or restart it) gracefully from within Windows.

But OP didn't say he was going to NOT do a Windows shutdown, so I
assumed he was (e.g. via RDP). Power cycling does appear necessary, just
occasionally, for reasons that are anything but obvious. Some machines
never seem to need it, others sometimes, and a few, quite often. Most
often I find that a machine starts to closedown but somehow never quite
terminates. Also, he might wish to switch machine off via RDP, then
switch it back on remotely. That does require power off/power on.

Anyway, 'tis no different to power failure. Might not be something to
choose to do, but rarely really causes a problem.

--
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
www.thyromind.info www.thyroiduk.org www.altsupportthyroid.org

In article ,
Gotde T Shirt writes:
On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 03:10:19 -0700 (PDT), Jethro wrote:

I want to be able to power-cycle my loft based PC ... anyone know of a
good reliable remote control plug ?

Power cycling a Windows PC via the mains power input isn't to be
recommended, because it can lead to disk corruption. You're supposed to
shut it down (or restart it) gracefully from within Windows.

He might be running a less fragile OS ;-)

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

Andrew Gabriel wrote:
In article ,
Gotde T Shirt writes:
On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 03:10:19 -0700 (PDT), Jethro wrote:

I want to be able to power-cycle my loft based PC ... anyone know of a
good reliable remote control plug ?
Power cycling a Windows PC via the mains power input isn't to be
recommended, because it can lead to disk corruption. You're supposed to
shut it down (or restart it) gracefully from within Windows.

He might be running a less fragile OS ;-)


it doesn't matter what OS he's running: power cyckling is the only
option when all other methods have failed.

That can be due to slightly malfunctioning hardware, or simply a obscure
software bug.

"Huge" wrote in message
...

it doesn't matter what OS he's running: power cyckling is the only
option when all other methods have failed.

I'm just trying to remember the last time I had to reboot a Solaris system
because "all other methods have failed", bearing in mind that I've been
responsible for thousands of them over decades. And the answer is ... so
rarely
does it happen that I cannot remember.

I had hundreds of SVr5 machines and we used to switch them off whenever we
had an excuse.. it was one way of testing the journaling file system to see
if it worked as required.

In article ,
"dennis@home" writes:


"Huge" wrote in message
...

it doesn't matter what OS he's running: power cyckling is the only
option when all other methods have failed.

I'm just trying to remember the last time I had to reboot a Solaris system
because "all other methods have failed", bearing in mind that I've been
responsible for thousands of them over decades. And the answer is ... so
rarely
does it happen that I cannot remember.

I had hundreds of SVr5 machines and we used to switch them off whenever we
had an excuse.. it was one way of testing the journaling file system to see
if it worked as required.

Journaling file system are so last millenium.
ZFS manages this fines without journaling... :-)

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

"Andrew Gabriel" andrew@cucumber wrote in message
...
In article ,
"dennis@home" writes:


"Huge" wrote in message
...

it doesn't matter what OS he's running: power cyckling is the only
option when all other methods have failed.

I'm just trying to remember the last time I had to reboot a Solaris
system
because "all other methods have failed", bearing in mind that I've been
responsible for thousands of them over decades. And the answer is ... so
rarely
does it happen that I cannot remember.

I had hundreds of SVr5 machines and we used to switch them off whenever
we
had an excuse.. it was one way of testing the journaling file system to
see
if it worked as required.

Journaling file system are so last millenium.
ZFS manages this fines without journaling... :-)

That's because it journals.

They may call it an intent log but it is a journal.

The veritas file system we were using also had an intent log so its not
something new.
In fact Sun acquired the source for it when the bought out SVr5 in the
eighties.

Huge wrote:
On 2008-09-30, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Andrew Gabriel wrote:
In article ,
Gotde T Shirt writes:
On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 03:10:19 -0700 (PDT), Jethro wrote:

I want to be able to power-cycle my loft based PC ... anyone know of a
good reliable remote control plug ?
Power cycling a Windows PC via the mains power input isn't to be
recommended, because it can lead to disk corruption. You're supposed to
shut it down (or restart it) gracefully from within Windows.
He might be running a less fragile OS ;-)

it doesn't matter what OS he's running: power cyckling is the only
option when all other methods have failed.

I'm just trying to remember the last time I had to reboot a Solaris system
because "all other methods have failed", bearing in mind that I've been
responsible for thousands of them over decades. And the answer is ... so rarely
does it happen that I cannot remember.

Oh, I had two or three in my time. Mainly overheated and crashed
completely due to fan failures.

A power cycle got them going long enough to do emergency access stuff
before we could get to them and replace the fans.

A lot depends on what access you have to e.g. serial ports.


A lot of times we couldn't TELNET in and if we didnt have reverse
terminal servers to use as serial boot devices, we would power cyccle if
they had frozen and wouldn't accept a network connection.


However that generally didn't work if they were FSCKed..reverse terminal
servers were better as you could with the error messages in boot..and go
down with the right bits of hardware.

In article ,
"dennis@home" writes:


"Andrew Gabriel" andrew@cucumber wrote in message
...
Journaling file system are so last millenium.
ZFS manages this fines without journaling... :-)

That's because it journals.

They may call it an intent log but it is a journal.

No. A journal keeps filesystem metadata (the data such as
directories and inodes) which is required to ensure the
filesystem remains self-consistent. It doesn't care about
the file contents. The ZFS intent log is for POSIX commit
symantics, i.e. when you explicitly flush a file to disk (and
it does care about file contents, and some metadata changes).
ZFS has no need to journal by design, as the filesystem
metadata is never inconsistent on disk at any point in
time (so the journal would always be empty if it had one,
which is why it doesn't have one, nor an fsck command as
there can never be any journal to replay).

The veritas file system we were using also had an intent log so its not
something new.
In fact Sun acquired the source for it when the bought out SVr5 in the
eighties.

There's no veritas file system source in SVR4. (There's no
such thing as SVR5 -- it was a SCO marketing term only
which came from their doomed project to merge SVR4 and HP-UX.)
AIX's filesystem and volume management was developed for
them by veritas, and that probably has internal similarities
with veritas's, but isn't part of the SVR4 sources, and Sun
don't have it. The main SVR4 filesystem, ufs, is derived
from the Berkely Fast Filesystem, via SunOS 4, which AT&T
paid Sun to port into SVR4 (as part of the SunOS 4 memory
management system port to SRV4 which AT&T commissioned Sun
to do). There was no journaling in SVR4 when Sun and AT&T
finished producing it, and Solaris split off. Sun added
journaling to Solaris around 1994 as part of the Disksuite
add-on, and moved the journaling into base Solaris starting
with Solaris 7 (1998?). If journaling appeared in SVR4 source,
it would have been done by AT&T, Novell, or SCO at some later
date. SVR3 and earlier SysV unixes used the System V filesystem
as the default filesystem. (Most vendors created their own variants
of the System V filesystem towards the end of SVR3, as the basic
one had a number of increasingly unacceptable restrictions, such
as 32k or 64k max number of files (or rather inodes), fairly
small max filesize by today's standards, small max filesystem
size, no symlinks, etc.)

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

On 1 Oct, 13:49, "dennis@home" wrote:

I had hundreds of SVr5 machines and we used to switch them off whenever we
had an excuse.. it was one way of testing the journaling file system to see
if it worked as required.

That, and it was time for you to run the vacuum cleaner round the
office after the programmers had gone home for the day.

"Andrew Gabriel" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"dennis@home" writes:


"Andrew Gabriel" andrew@cucumber wrote in message
...
Journaling file system are so last millenium.
ZFS manages this fines without journaling... :-)

That's because it journals.

They may call it an intent log but it is a journal.

No. A journal keeps filesystem metadata (the data such as
directories and inodes) which is required to ensure the
filesystem remains self-consistent. It doesn't care about
the file contents.

If you want to define it that way, however the veritas system could put the
data into the log if you asked it to.

The ZFS intent log is for POSIX commit
symantics, i.e. when you explicitly flush a file to disk (and
it does care about file contents, and some metadata changes).
ZFS has no need to journal by design, as the filesystem
metadata is never inconsistent on disk at any point in
time (so the journal would always be empty if it had one,
which is why it doesn't have one, nor an fsck command as
there can never be any journal to replay).

The veritas file system we were using also had an intent log so its not
something new.
In fact Sun acquired the source for it when the bought out SVr5 in the
eighties.

There's no veritas file system source in SVR4. (There's no
such thing as SVR5 -- it was a SCO marketing term only
which came from their doomed project to merge SVR4 and HP-UX.)

Your unix knowledge is a bit lacking.
SVr5 predates SCO by a good margin.
And I know there was veritas source code in it as I had the source code.
In fact I worked with the engineers to customise SVr5 to do what we needed
as well as designing some STREAMs modules to do pseudo real time stuff.
I think you will find it was univel (sp?) hat was spun off from AT&T that
developed SVr5.
One of the main things they did was to compartmentalize the kernel so it
could get B2 (IIRC) security.

BTW all the System X exchanges have Veritas file systems running on some of
the hardware, I put it there.

AIX's filesystem and volume management was developed for
them by veritas, and that probably has internal similarities
with veritas's, but isn't part of the SVR4 sources, and Sun
don't have it. The main SVR4 filesystem, ufs, is derived
from the Berkely Fast Filesystem, via SunOS 4, which AT&T
paid Sun to port into SVR4 (as part of the SunOS 4 memory
management system port to SRV4 which AT&T commissioned Sun
to do). There was no journaling in SVR4 when Sun and AT&T
finished producing it, and Solaris split off. Sun added
journaling to Solaris around 1994 as part of the Disksuite
add-on, and moved the journaling into base Solaris starting
with Solaris 7 (1998?). If journaling appeared in SVR4 source,
it would have been done by AT&T, Novell, or SCO at some later
date. SVR3 and earlier SysV unixes used the System V filesystem
as the default filesystem. (Most vendors created their own variants
of the System V filesystem towards the end of SVR3, as the basic
one had a number of increasingly unacceptable restrictions, such
as 32k or 64k max number of files (or rather inodes), fairly
small max filesize by today's standards, small max filesystem
size, no symlinks, etc.)

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

In article ,
"dennis@home" writes:


"Andrew Gabriel" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"dennis@home" writes:
There's no veritas file system source in SVR4. (There's no
such thing as SVR5 -- it was a SCO marketing term only
which came from their doomed project to merge SVR4 and HP-UX.)

Your unix knowledge is a bit lacking.

Unlikely. I've been working on the System V source code since
SVR3.0 (on the first commercial unix source allowed into the UK
by Bell labs).

SVr5 predates SCO by a good margin.

I'm suspecting you're mixing that up with up System V Release 4.
SVR5 came out of the 3DA project between SCO (just after they
bought the SVR4 source code from Novell) and HP. 3DA died (just
as I predicted it would at the time), but SCO continued using
the SVR5 name for Unixware 7, the merging they did between
Openserver 5 (SVR3.2) and Unixware 2 (SVR4) at the time. No one
else used the term - unlike SVR4, it was not a recognised industry
standard, and it's died along with SCO - they never made a viable
business out of any of the Unixware releases. SCO itself long
predates any System V unix - it goes back to System III unix on
which Xenix was based (a joint effort between SCO and Microsoft at
the time, amazingly now).

And I know there was veritas source code in it as I had the source code.
In fact I worked with the engineers to customise SVr5 to do what we needed
as well as designing some STREAMs modules to do pseudo real time stuff.
I think you will find it was univel (sp?) hat was spun off from AT&T that
developed SVr5.

AT&T sold SVR4 and USL (Unix Systems Labs) to Novell (which is
where the Univel word comes from), who then sold it to SCO. SCO
thought they could create SVR5 as an industry standard like SVR4
was, but no one else in the industry was interested. In subsequent
conversations with former SCO employees, apparently SCO thought
that SVR4 was effectively Solaris, and they were buying Solaris.
This was very wrong. Solaris never was entirely SVR4, and it had
moved on way past SVR4 with a fully preemptive kernel, very many
multi-processor support, and realtime scheduling, and rock solid
threads support, which SVR4 (and hence SVR5 too) never caught up
with. (Since you mention STREAMS, that was one of the major areas
which Sun had to do significant work on to make it properly
preemptive, multi-threaded, multi-processor, and support realtime
processes, which the stock SVR4/5 STREAMS framework couldn't get
close to doing.)

One of the main things they did was to compartmentalize the kernel so it
could get B2 (IIRC) security.

BTW all the System X exchanges have Veritas file systems running on some of
the hardware, I put it there.

Veritas sell their filesystem technology for a wide variety of
unixes including SVR4 flavours, but they've never put it into
the SVR4 codebase. It very likely exists in various private
branches off the SVR4 codebase for specific manufacturer's systems,
where those manufacturers have purchased it from veritas (now
Symantec). AIX is one such (although that's originally branched
from SVR3, not SVR4, and quite possibly HP-UX which is similarly
originally branched from SVR3).

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

On 30 Sep, 10:47, Gotde T Shirt wrote:
On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 03:10:19 -0700 (PDT), Jethro wrote:
I want to be able to power-cycle my loft based PC ... anyone know of a
good reliable remote control plug ?

Power cycling a Windows PC via the mains power input isn't to be
recommended, because it can lead to disk corruption. You're supposed to
shut it down (or restart it) gracefully from within Windows.

There are other operating systems other than Windows ...

Jethro wrote:

There are other operating systems other than Windows ...

.... many of which are equally unhappy about having the power killed...

Windoze (and I'm sure most of the others) can be shut down remotely,
which is better for the health of the file system.

Andy

On the original subject

http://www.lidl.co.uk/uk/home.nsf/pa...Socket_Set.ar3

Next Thursday.

"Jethro" wrote in message
...
I want to be able to power-cycle my loft based PC ... anyone know of a
good reliable remote control plug ?


Lidl have a pack of 4 on thursday with remote controler.

You will prolly have to input your postcode first?
http://www.lidl.co.uk/uk/home.nsf/pa...1009.index.ar7

On 29 Sep, 11:10, Jethro wrote:
I want to be able to power-cycle my loft based PC ... anyone know of a
good reliable remote control plug ?

Well, B&Q and the 3pack "Home-Easy" on/off plugs are now chez Jethro.
1 is already on the PC, and the other two are awaiting a sensible
application ... I suspect the outdoor Xmas lights will be first in
line.

Quite impressed with the Home-Easy range ... home automation never
seemed so easy. I particularly liked the SMS-driven controllers,
although I can't think of a use right now.

Just to explain why I wanted the plug in the first place .... I've
wanted to set up a "download" server for ages now, which I can whack a
bitorrent, or large FTP onto, and just leave it running. However there
is no way on Gods green earth I'm going to leave a Windows box open to
the internet 24/7, firewall or not. Which proved a good excuse to
teach myself Linux (Ubuntu). However, due to various struggles getting
a wireless USB key working the whole project took a *little* longer
than I told the missis. To be fair, she'd been very patient, and
didn't harp on about the loss of the front room. However after 4
months it was a little more than a joke, and I was given an
ultimatum ... so the PC went into the loft, without being 100%
prepared, or tested (at least I can NXMachine into it).

It's "frozen" a couple of times, and required a restart (after which
it works fine), and having to get the loft ladder down etc etc etc -
especially if I'm not at home (I remote in from work, and the missis
can't climb a ladder). So I thought the remote was the best solution -
although it remains very much a "nuclear" option.

Fingers crossed, the machine stayed up 10 days before I fitted the
plug, so it's possible that the problems been fixed by one of the
updates I installed recently.

Thanks for everyones help - hope you all enjoyed the debate !

"Jethro" wrote in message
...
On 29 Sep, 11:10, Jethro wrote:
I want to be able to power-cycle my loft based PC ... anyone know of a
good reliable remote control plug ?

Well, B&Q and the 3pack "Home-Easy" on/off plugs are now chez Jethro.
1 is already on the PC, and the other two are awaiting a sensible
application ... I suspect the outdoor Xmas lights will be first in
line.

Quite impressed with the Home-Easy range ... home automation never
seemed so easy. I particularly liked the SMS-driven controllers,
although I can't think of a use right now.

Just to explain why I wanted the plug in the first place .... I've
wanted to set up a "download" server for ages now, which I can whack a
bitorrent, or large FTP onto, and just leave it running. However there
is no way on Gods green earth I'm going to leave a Windows box open to
the internet 24/7, firewall or not.

I have had several windows boxes open to the internet 24/7 for years and
never had a successful attack on them, even when running utorrent and emule.
The security problems are very exaggerated.


Which proved a good excuse to
teach myself Linux (Ubuntu). However, due to various struggles getting
a wireless USB key working the whole project took a *little* longer
than I told the missis. To be fair, she'd been very patient, and
didn't harp on about the loss of the front room. However after 4
months it was a little more than a joke, and I was given an
ultimatum ... so the PC went into the loft, without being 100%
prepared, or tested (at least I can NXMachine into it).

It's "frozen" a couple of times, and required a restart

Don't mention that in a linux group.. they will savage you for being a
troll.

(after which
it works fine), and having to get the loft ladder down etc etc etc -
especially if I'm not at home (I remote in from work, and the missis
can't climb a ladder). So I thought the remote was the best solution -
although it remains very much a "nuclear" option.

Fingers crossed, the machine stayed up 10 days before I fitted the
plug, so it's possible that the problems been fixed by one of the
updates I installed recently.

10 days!!!
I expect my NT machines to be up for months.
Even my vista laptop runs for weeks at a time before M$ issues a fix that
needs a reboot, it never crashes.

If yours was crashing after a few days it was well broken.

On Mon, 6 Oct 2008 15:49:26 UTC, Jethro wrote:

Just to explain why I wanted the plug in the first place .... I've
wanted to set up a "download" server for ages now, which I can whack a
bitorrent, or large FTP onto, and just leave it running. However there
is no way on Gods green earth I'm going to leave a Windows box open to
the internet 24/7, firewall or not.

Depends on the firewall. I have one Windows box like that; been on 24/7
for about 4 years.

It's "frozen" a couple of times, and required a restart (after which
it works fine), and having to get the loft ladder down etc etc etc -
especially if I'm not at home (I remote in from work, and the missis
can't climb a ladder). So I thought the remote was the best solution -
although it remains very much a "nuclear" option.

Fingers crossed, the machine stayed up 10 days before I fitted the
plug, so it's possible that the problems been fixed by one of the
updates I installed recently.

Or it's an overheating/underheating/PSU/other_hardware problem. I have
FreeBSD boxes that have stayed up for months at a time, only rebooted
because of power cuts or upgrades. But then Linux *is* just a jumped up
UNIX wannabe!

--
The information contained in this post is copyright the
poster, and specifically may not be published in, or used by
http://www.diybanter.com