<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 9:01 AM, Steve Daniels <<a href="mailto:steve.p.daniels@googlemail.com">steve.p.daniels@googlemail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">
<div class="Ih2E3d">2008/6/26 Phil Bridges <<a href="mailto:gravityhammer@gmail.com">gravityhammer@gmail.com</a>>:<br></div>
<div class="Ih2E3d">> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 7:54 AM, Ma Begaj <<a href="mailto:derliebegott@gmail.com">derliebegott@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>>> 2008/6/26 Roy Lofthouse <<a href="mailto:lofty69@gmail.com">lofty69@gmail.com</a>>:<br>
</div>
<div class="Ih2E3d">>>> I would prefer a system that is on 24x7 but I want something that is<br>>>> low powered, quite quiet and can be located somewhere out of the way<br>>>> and I'm hoping this is feasible.<br>
>><br>>><br>>> I was also thinking the same thing, but it is not true. It needs<br>>> mythbackend for something (no idea what for).<br>>><br>>> But you could install a master backend without tuners on your NAS<br>
>> machine, and use your other backend as a slave backend. Your NAS is<br>>> always online -> your master backend is online.<br>><br>> The backend is what serves up your recorded files. It has to be on.<br>
> IIRC, the master backend also has to have at least one tuner.<br><br></div>I believe this to be incorrect.</blockquote>
<div> </div>
<div>Sorry. The backend has to be available for the frontend to connect to AND has to have at least one tuner.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Kevin</div></div>