Ideally, there’d be a simple RPM installer compatible with Alma 9 that I can point to a samba share that holds all the photos, kind of like what I do with Jellyfin. Also nice if it uses an otherwise unused port or I can easily set what port it uses.

My googling is finding a bunch of docker stuff, which always seems needlessly complicated to me vs an RPM… I’m also using a low powered x86 tiny computer to front JellyFin and would like to host this on the same computer vs needing another server.

Any ideas?

  • ChrislyBear@lemmy.worldEnglish
    371·
    4 months ago

    I recently started using https://github.com/immich-app/immich

    It’s basically a self hosted Google Photos and it’s working really well. You can just mount your heap of photos into the container, declare it as external library and you’re good to go.

    After a few hours/days of training the face recognition, extracting meta data, generating thumbnails ans possibly transcoding videos you’ll have a very responsive and easily searchable timeline of ALL your pictures and videos.

    • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.caEnglish
      12·
      4 months ago

      I love how they literally ripped off Google Photos’ interface, including using the same Material icons. I could navigate it via muscle memory. 😅

  • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.caEnglish
    374·
    4 months ago

    Get out of the anti container mindset. Getting started with docker takes half an hour. You need to learn 3-4 commands to use other people’s services. Everything is easier than RPMs afterwards.

      • MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
        40·
        4 months ago

        They’re also useful because they’re easy to deploy, contain all the dependencies needed, portable, and isolate things breaking from affecting the host or other containers.

      • uzay@infosec.pubEnglish
        35·
        4 months ago

        Containers are useful for a lot more things than scaling. E.g. portability, ease of setup, dependency separation.

      • SDK@midwest.socialEnglish
        334·
        4 months ago

        The confidence with which you make this factually incorrect statement is mind bending.

          • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.caEnglish
            12·
            4 months ago

            What are you talking about… Containers make it way easier to setup and operate services, especially multicomponent services like Immich. I just tried Immich and it took me several minutes to get it running. If I wanted to give it permanent storage, I’d have to spend several more to make a directory then add a line in a file and restart it. I’ve been setting up services before Linux containers became a thing and after. I’d never go back to the pre-container times if I have the choice.

          • Nibodhika@lemmy.worldEnglish
            11·
            4 months ago

            Because it’s easier to tell someone “use this docker image” than it is to tell them “go through all of these thousands of steps to get this service working”.

            The main reason I use containers for my personal things is easy to setup and to migrate, those are huge points, and the added complexity is not that much, in fact I would argue it’s less complicated to figure out why a docker image is not running than figure out why a service stopped responding.

            • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.techEnglish
              51·
              4 months ago

              Agreed, sure scaling is one factor, but I don’t think this person has ever really dived into why containers are slick. Why you aren’t tracking down what dependency hell caused your app to crash. Conflicting cuda versions. Two apps using the same port. Trying to decipher a language you’ve never used before

              Whenever I hear “containers are too complex” or “I don’t like containers” I read it as “I don’t understand containers”. There are some real flaws to them, but no self respecting ops engineer would ever say “containers have no value beyond scaling”

          • summerof69@lemm.eeEnglish
            7·
            4 months ago

            Sure, let’s add another layer of complexity for the user to set up their network, storage, and other external resources

            And then users go to lemmy and ask for a software that is compatible with Alma 9 instead of getting a single docker-compose.yaml file and running docker compose up - d

      • MigratingtoLemmy@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        4 months ago

        If you’re talking about k8s or similar, the initial time investment is heavy. After that though, it’s not very hard to get containers running with HA, better network segmentation and compatibility across run times. Containers are a lot more portable too, and allow granular levels of isolation and security.

        Also, I personally think SELinux is somewhat hard to do well.

  • catloaf@lemm.eeEnglish
    92·
    4 months ago

    Install docker: https://docs.docker.com/engine/install/centos/

    Then running a container is just same as installing an RPM, except you don’t have to download it first. You just docker run the container.

    You can probably get regular old packages for a lot of stuff, but a lot of stuff is packaged as containers because it makes everything easier for both the maintainer and the user.

  • Shimitar@feddit.itEnglish
    51·
    4 months ago

    Docker (better use Podman!) Is, I am afraid, hard to avoid nowadays. I fully agree with you that bare-metal deployment should always be an option.

    Its one of my biggest issues with immich/photoprism/librephotos but there is no way around that.

    Immich is the only container I have on my system… A necessary evil (joking).

    I know containers now, but still don’t like them too much. I am old I am afraid.

    But you shouldn’t be FORCED to use containers, that’s my point.

    • Phrey@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
      7·
      4 months ago

      No one is forcing you to use containers for Immich. It’s simply the most robust way to support it for the team.

      You can just take a look at the dockerfiles and follow those steps on bare metal.

      • Shimitar@feddit.itEnglish
        12·
        4 months ago

        No, I am forced to use containers because… There are no instructions for bare-metal installation and they also do not provide any instruction on how to build from sources (and I tried…)

        Also, there are no binary releases only docker-compose.

        All in all, immich cannot be deployed but with containers.

        No choice: not good.

        • Phrey@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
          3·
          4 months ago

          Like I said, if you follow the dockerfiles you will end up with a similar result on bare metal.

          It’s your own decision if you want to deviate from what the developers want to support.

          A project doesn’t need to produce binary releases.

          • Shimitar@feddit.itEnglish
            1·
            4 months ago

            It is true that a project doesn’t need to release binaries. But either those or the instructions on how to build from sources I think are somewhat expected.

            Said so, I am hosting immich on docker because, specially on such fast evolving and kind of “beta” software its by far the fastest way.

        • Scipitie@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
          1·
          4 months ago

          A Dockerfile itself is the instruction set. There is a certain minimum requirement expected from a server admin that differs from end-user requirements.

          The ease of docker obfuscates that quite a bit but if you want to go full bare metal (or full AWS or GCS, etc etc) then you need to manage the full admin part as well - including custom deployments.

          • Shimitar@feddit.itEnglish
            2·
            4 months ago

            Indeed I am a quite proficient sysadmin for my home server, while not a professional one.

            I didn’t consider a docker file as instructions for bare metal install, thanks for the suggestion. I am currently using podman with immich because its release cycles are too fast for me to catch up otherwise.

            I am thinking to experiment with something different from immich because, while its a great tool, it’s “just” (no pun intended) a backup solution for mobile devices and I need something more than that.

            I was considering https://damselfly.info/ which looks more like the workflow I am looking to implement.

  • BentiGorlich@gehirneimer.de
    3·
    4 months ago

    What about nextcloud? With the memories app you have something like google photos with locally running face recognition and a timeline, etc etc. I really like it

  • MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
    3·
    4 months ago

    The simplest option is just connect via SMB, WebDAV, NFS, etc and browse using your normal file browser.

    There are a ton of various web based photo galleries: https://github.com/awesome-selfhosted/awesome-selfhosted?tab=readme-ov-file#photo-and-video-galleries

    Some can be hosted on your basic Nginx+PHP+MariaDB stack which is more complex to set up, but most are going to be meant for deployment on Docker because that makes everything very easy.

    • jmp242@sopuli.xyzOPEnglish
      1·
      4 months ago

      Testing the Jellyfin photos thing out now. I don’t know if it’s working right, but when I first looked at it the issue was I thought it seemed very video focused. I guess otherwise I’m learning docker after all.

  • Moonrise2473@feddit.itEnglish
    2·
    4 months ago

    i think you will like pigallery2

    while you could install node via rpm, you really want to run this in a docker container