docker-plex VS flood

I've tried with couple of repositories but I'm mainly using this one now: lscr.io/linuxserver/plex I gave up on this sometime ago but would now like to get at least RAM transcode working for Plex. The GPU transcode can wait.

I found this, but don't see anything similar for ghcr.io in the images list in the docker UI.

I'm facing a similar issue. I reported it to the linuxserver team (publisher of that docker image), they think it's a plex issue. https://github.com/linuxserver/docker-plex/issues/357

I've messed with Plex in docker quite a lot though, so if you put your code in GitHub I should be able to point out an option for getting it done. Might not make sense for Plexamp for some reason, I've usually started with this repo https://github.com/linuxserver/docker-plex and forked when I was making my own Plex containers. I was thinking of doing that for Plexamp, but I've not looked at what's needed to map sound devices properly. It has an example of where to run a Plex claim script before starting up Plex to run as a service.

FWIW it's probably not a great idea to use the Plex or Jellyfin (or any really) images from lsio. They do stupid shit like this which is not needed with Kubernetes. You can add a security context with those GIDs as supplemental groups. Also all their containers start as root which is not considered best practice.

These are their historical container versions - https://github.com/linuxserver/docker-plex/releases

The linuxserver plex image can actually check for updates when the container starts. It's a bit of an anti-pattern. Here's the script: https://github.com/linuxserver/docker-plex/blob/master/root/etc/s6-overlay/s6-rc.d/init-plex-update/run

Why bake libtransmission into the app instead of just using the transmission daemon's RPC?

What you've done actually makes it harder to use, because in order to configure any of transmission's settings (ports, connection/torrent connection limits, bandwith limits, etc) the user needs to dig around to find the transmission config folder and then manually edit JSON with a text editor - because your client doesn't expose any of transmissions numerous settings [1] to the user except for choosing the download folder.

I'm not sure why anyone would want to use this instead of Flood [2] or even old Transmission Web Control [3]

1: https://github.com/transmission/transmission/blob/main/docs/...

1: https://github.com/jesec/flood

2: https://github.com/ronggang/transmission-web-control

Only one that I'm aware of is Flood: https://github.com/jesec/flood

If you haven't seen the https://flood.js.org project before. It has subjectively a nicer ui and works with qbittorent.

You can install alternate web UIs very easy. I’m a big fan of Flood, which is mobile friendly: https://flood.js.org/

One note: I lean heavily on an API to manage it so I'd love to continue using flood, I tested qbittorrent with it briefly and it didn't go well.

You mean a torrent client? I’m using rTorrent with Flood (the new jesec fork that’s actually active) and it works brilliantly on mobile

https://flood.js.org/ ?

If it's just the web ui you're worried about perhaps look into installing Flood & see if it helps? It's going to be a better web ui overall. (I've never needed to use it personally but it's been recommended in the pat)

qbitorrent-nox with flood-ui

Impressive. But I dont get why they would rebuild the web client when there are existing options like: https://github.com/jesec/flood