vicidial.org

We have released the VICIbox LiveCD demo ISO for download this week.

This allows you to try out VICIDIAL on any computer without having to overwrite your harddrive.

The ISO contains a complete functional install of VICIDIAL 2.0.5 along with Asterisk, MySQL, Apache and everything else needed to run VICIDIAL including a soft-phone and Firefox web browser to use the admin and agent interfaces. You don't even need an internet connection to get everything working because it is all on board the ISO.

For more information or to download the ISO, go to:
http://www.vicibox.com

It's getting harder and harder to keep up with all the latest news, amazing work, thanks!

I see ViciBox Server is also available. Great stuff!! Just for interest sake, why are you using Ubuntu rather than Slackware?

Tested both in VMware- worked just fine. Vicibox server installed fine, couldn't see any errors. Did not tested it with an agent or phones.

Awesome work, thanks a lot to the team, long waited feature

Ubuntu is easier to do a single CD ISO install with than slackware, and Ubuntu has commercial, long-term support available which Slackware does not offer.

Thanks for the testing, we will most likely announce it and add it to the current VICIDIALnow forum since it is a similar product.

Where is a direct link to the iso ?

Also i thought the vicibox was cd only and reset on reboots, is that true ?

http://download.vicidial.com/iso/vicibo ... 0-i386.iso

There are two versions- vicibox server and vicibox demo, what you mention is about the demo. Isn't the description of both clear enough?- http://www.vicibox.com/

i mean 2.0.5..

I have clients running that and would like to help them out, but first i need to install same version and know more

Well, have you opened www.vicibox.com and read what is on the front page?

...VICIbox Demo is a live CD based off of Ubuntu desktop. Included is a functional version of Vicidial 2.0.5 which runs off of the CD...

VICIbox server would also install vicidial vers. 2.0.5.

Okli, Does it means that we can install ViciBox even without Internet Like ViciDialNOW and then later configure static IP and make it production ?

I guess No, as "VICIbox Demo should not be used in production."

I am looking for something on Ubuntu which install all like VicidialNOW does on CentOS.

Or in other words , when can we expect ViciBox rc3 to get Released ?

We are working on an OpenSuSE-based next version of ViciBox that will be much easier for us to maintain and it will have an offline install option.

Just bit impatient ,

By when can we expect it ?

You need to test more - Dell, defacto standard, with a PERC4 controller will not install with your software as is..... hates hardware raid.... get the bugs out then release it.

Goautodial has no issues with hardware raid, too bad we couldnt get a centos install and toss out Novell!!! thought they died years ago...

mflorell wrote:We have released the VICIbox LiveCD demo ISO for download this week.

This allows you to try out VICIDIAL on any computer without having to overwrite your harddrive.

The ISO contains a complete functional install of VICIDIAL 2.0.5 along with Asterisk, MySQL, Apache and everything else needed to run VICIDIAL including a soft-phone and Firefox web browser to use the admin and agent interfaces. You don't even need an internet connection to get everything working because it is all on board the ISO.

For more information or to download the ISO, go to:
http://www.vicibox.com

this thread pertains to the vicibox demo cd which was vicibox 1.0.0RC2 on ubuntu from over two years ago.

perhaps you meant to post it on the Vicibox 3.1.12 release announcement along with your model number of your megaraid that it is not compatible with (so others will not purchase that specific hardware and attempt what has just bothered you ... save someone else's hair).

also, if someone else has the exact same model and found a "workaround" for it, they may post an answer for you!

We never use Dell, so we don't really test on it. Dell hardware has an unacceptably high failure rate, this is documented, they were sued for it in a class action lawsuit, and they lost. Saying Dell is a "superior" brand is like saying McDonalds hamburger is better than Black Angus steak. Better sales numbers don't make something higher quality.

The red-hat family of distros have many problems as well, which is why we went with OpenSuSE, the reasons for this have been gone over many times on this forum so I don't feel the need to rehash them here.

If you want to use another distro, that's fine, but instead of complaining, how about you put your money where your mouth is and build your own ISO installer?

Another point to mention is that while many have tried to install "scratch" on a large quantity of distros, few have succeeded in "stable" installs on CentOS (Gardo is one of those exceptions!). There have not been many others, but there have been PLENTY on Ubuntu and other distros (we, for instance used to build exclusively in Gentoo before Vicibox came out).

Gardo was nice enough to publish an .iso version of his result (ok, not entirely altruistic, as his .iso is quite decidedly commercialized for some sales results, but it DOES work ...).

You could certainly try a 64-bit manual install with his installer, but it would likely cost less to have Gardo install it for you and then clone it. Perhaps if you MUST have CentOS, you could discuss a 64 bit version with Gardo ...?

Otherwise, get something other than Dell or pay someone else to install on the Dells. We have exactly Two Dells in our colo (both from the same client). But we do have a few clients with Dells in-house who have had successful installs. With no noticeable problems. But most of those were delivered to our shop for build-out and then shipped back to the client (because they have Fiber!).

If you wanted to pop for the shipping, we may even be interested in Building one in CentOS 64-bit for you (without a fee if we can't do it). But beware: The Vicidial Group will not support any OS related issues on a CentOS box. So your support options will always be limited. AFAIK: Poundteam and Gardo.

I am sure that I speak for many IT Directors out there.

Use Centos.

It runs all of the hardware I have ever tested. Having stated we do not have anyone but GoautoDIal using Centos is crazy and for no other reason to eliminate hardware issues such as discussed in previous posts.

Why use Suse and Ubuntu while refusing to use a better OS like Centos? The only conclusion is money from your last post.

I would rather load an ISO myself that works than pay to ship a server somewhere and have it shipped back. I do not need the loss of time, money and the possibility of damage or lost product.

It is not the hardware its the OS and I am trying to make a point here that the selections by the VICI authors as to an OS are flawed and excluding Centos in support of an ISO is stupid.

Thank you.

You should do a search in the forums regarding Centos. It has been discussed too many times to count.

But yes, if you feel so strongly about it then do your own ISO. I suspect Matt is not gonna go with Centos and that is it.

Just trying to point out the basic flaws of not including Centos, getting to be a big issue on larger systems.

I would not have posted again except Bill didnt seem to get my point and I wanted it crystal clear.

Trying wrote:You should do a search in the forums regarding Centos. It has been discussed too many times to count.

But yes, if you feel so strongly about it then do your own ISO. I suspect Matt is not gonna go with Centos and that is it.

Trying is not Bill. (Bill is williamconley ... note the "william" in williamconley ...?)

Please explain in detail exactly how you think that CentOS is a "better" distro than OpenSuSE.

I used to use redhat-based distros for many years, until about redhat 8(8-10 years ago) when they started to have issues with standard packages like Perl. As we started to maintain hundreds of high-load systems we began to realize the flaws and inconsistencies with redhat-based distros and we began looking for alternatives. We tried Ubuntu and it worked great for a while until they started their rapid release schedule and then things like updating their kernel headers with their kernel became regularly out of sync and we knew they weren't really a viable architecture for along term support platform. Starting about 4 years ago we settled on OpenSuSE and we have been very happy with our choice. We support thousands of servers across hundreds of companies and SuSE has proven to be extremely reliable and well maintained. We have been able to find drivers for any piece of hardware we need on SuSE(although sometimes not default loaded with the ISO), and the maintainers of OpenSuSE are the same people that maintain commercial SuSE(unlike with CentOS).

There was a great posting on slashdot yesterday talking about CentOS, and among it's flaws are that sometimes it can take a year for security patches marked critical to be ported to CentOS from redhat, that seems pretty bad to me. CentOS also had a near meltdown last year when their maintainer went AWOL with all of their money. All of that is just CentOS-specific, but there are larger problems with the redhat family in general, like their use of non-standard binutils, their forced backporting of kernel modules to keep with their all-important kernel number freeze(even at the expense of stability), the use of desktop-level kernel preemption even on supposed server-level ISO installers, the use of non-portable libraries and using non-standard naming conventions when compared to almost every other distro. None of these are issues with OpenSuSE, Ubuntu or most other distros. Heck, even Oracle stopped using redhat distros a couple years ago because of the issues they were having with them.

So I ask again, what makes CentOS better? I have asked this of a lot of IT Managers that are die-hard CentOS fans, and I can never get much of an answer beyond the typical "it's what I've always used" or "a lot of companies use it". Just like with Dell, just because something is popular, doesn't make it the best solution.

Trying is not Bill. (Bill is williamconley ... note the "william" in williamconley ...?)

However, to be clear: Bill happens to be in agreement that not including CentOS is not a "Flaw". I like CentOS, don't get me wrong, but I'm of the opinion that anyone needing CentOS should be negotiating with Kumba to get whatever they want OR building a CentOS distro themselves. We have clients who want Ubuntu, so we'll be releasing that soon. But we have very few request for CentOS (of course, that could be because we refer CentOS people to Kumba ... but I personally started in the Linux world on CentOS and like it very much, even if their internal politics are hilarious sometimes).

the fact that you have some specific software that you like to use that is only compatible with a couple operating systems ... does not make CentOS "Better" (and I like it ... but that doesn't make it "better" either). Of course, I like Gentoo even more, but nobody cares about that! LOL

Your serious, I thought this thread was done... but here we go again.

Here’s how Nielsen/NetRatings ranks hardware manufacturers’ web sites by unique visitors in February (unique visitors count only once each shopper who came to a site, no matter how many time that shopper visited), with February this year, February last year and percent growth (in thousands):

•Apple, 41,850, 34,211, 22%
•Hewlett Packard, 16,369, 13,248, 24%
•Dell, 13,967, 14,705, -5%
•Sun Microsystems, 3,229, 3,975, -19%
•IBM, 2,023, 2,873, -30%
•Gateway, 1,941, 2,329, -17%
•Nintendo, 1,631, 856, 91%
•Linksys, 1,558, 1,099, 42%
•Palm, 1,400, 1,491, -6%
•EPSON, 1,359, 1,389, -2%


Now this list does not say which hardware was the most sold and I am sure if I took the time I could find you the list.

This list of site visits shows how popular a brand of hardware is by the general public.

My point as to hardware and Suse in general again is going back to what OS will work with 'SERVER' hardware and what does not work.

If you notice I highlighted 'SERVER', and not 'DESKTOP' which goes right to the heart of the issue.

Sure I could build up a desktop and plug in some sata drives and load SUSE. No muss no fuss and connect a few SIP clients. This is fine for a small business.

What happens to the recordings? What about the SQL database? Real time and nightly backups are issues with 50,000 calls a day loosing everything at 4:59pm would flat suck!

What if the client needs 50, 100 250+ sip stations?

We deal with Raid 10 replicated MYSQL, our recordings are rsync across 3 raid 5 storage servers, we have 7 Raid asterisk servers running today, which is slow for us.

RAID RAID RAID RAID RAID Phew..... see where this is going?

Our servers are poweredge 6850's which require 220v and we have the whole rooom on APC RT10000 Full time UPS 220v in 220v out, with a diesel generator sitting out back of the building.

Why? We do not want these servers to crash and or loose data.

What is the most reliable way of obtaining this? Yes, you gessed it 'HARDWARE RAID'.

Whe went full tilt on the raid, extra ram, batteries on the ram cards cache, 15k rpm drives. This is much better than plugging in some 5k rpm sata's to a MB and loading a software raid.

Here is the issue ... Suse does not work out of the box with most Dell raid cards. Same issue with many other brands raid cards. Yes I could load 3rd party drivers and such and figure it out.... but why? When Centos chugs right along with again you guessed it "RAID"!!!

Ubuntu is much more compatable with the Server worlds hardware than Novells Suse...

Ubuntu is fine until you decide to go APC with your very very expensive UPS.

http://shopping.yahoo.com/34516466-apc- ... LTDXcbFt0A

Yes, the price is almost $7,000 for one UPS and that is without extra batteries or the 70 amp dedicated circuit a licensed electrician should come out and install for you. Figure in 220v 20 amp C-14 to C-13 power cords and a couple metered PDU strips at $700.00 apiece to plug into the UPS and you see a true cost of getting reliable regulated power to the servers.

http://shopping.yahoo.com/75696144-apc- ... pYaXcbFt0A

Back to the issue - Ubuntu in thier wisdom decided not to follow Redhat or Centos in thier folder structure.

APC Smart ups monitoring and network shutdown software does not work with Ubuntu.

Somewhere in my email folder I have an Email message from an engineer at APC. He stated very clearly that APC will not install on Ubuntu and never will.

So we had to format our Storage servers that were on Ubuntu and load up Centos. This was a big chore due to the 27 million recordings currently stored there, we had to add a 2nd LAN copy via it due to the traffic on our layer 3 switches.

So with all of this long ballywho I can say I have tried to use Unbuntu, I love it and they even have a tablet version comming soon to compete with Android.

But please Ubuntu stay out of my server room.

I had at one time used Suse and was a convert due to having been affiliated with Novell and a CNE for many years....

I wonder what Novells world would have been like if Microsoft had stayed on just desktops. I do feel like they have missed the boat and should just retire the company.

Sorry to get so long winded but some early comments like shipping servers back and forth because the OS is limited on hardware support makes me wonder if you are going to go and recomend an Amiga or TOS .iso...just kiddng.

For you kids out there TOS is 'The Operating System', used by Atari on thier ST line.

Lastly thank you for all of the hard work. I am trying to get the point out there that Centos needs supported and the reason why many IT guys have gone out of thier way to get Centos on thier VICI systems even if the work involved is from a scratch install.

P.S. I knew the last post wasnt my buddy William, great guy has helped out alot.

williamconley wrote:Trying is not Bill. (Bill is williamconley ... note the "william" in williamconley ...?)

However, to be clear: Bill happens to be in agreement that not including CentOS is not a "Flaw". I like CentOS, don't get me wrong, but I'm of the opinion that anyone needing CentOS should be negotiating with Kumba to get whatever they want OR building a CentOS distro themselves. We have clients who want Ubuntu, so we'll be releasing that soon. But we have very few request for CentOS (of course, that could be because we refer CentOS people to Kumba ... but I personally started in the Linux world on CentOS and like it very much, even if their internal politics are hilarious sometimes).

the fact that you have some specific software that you like to use that is only compatible with a couple operating systems ... does not make CentOS "Better" (and I like it ... but that doesn't make it "better" either). Of course, I like Gentoo even more, but nobody cares about that! LOL

You sound like a guy who SHOULD be sponsoring a 64-bit CentOS .iso release. but a STAGNANT one capable of upgrading later, but not "install the latest greatest". install a snapshot so "later upgrades" (which inevitably break functionality) can be ignored as of the moment "the break" occurs.

what happens is that one creates the .iso install, and during installation the "latest" install happens and works fine. but two weeks later, Redhat/CentOS makes a ... small change in an obscure package that borks a perl package deep inside Vicidial and now the system won't run right (unstable, bad voice, no dispo screen, something stupider each time and harder to track down).

So a static install (with the Option to upgrade) ... requires that everything be contained on the install DVD (not CD, not enough room). That being possible, of course, doesn't mean anyone has been paid to do it. Kumba did it, but of his own free will (and because it generates revenue, of course, and then only 32-bit).

Maybe we'll do it after the Ubuntu. Assuming Kumba doesn't dive in.

william I actually cheer your responce.

We do not ever yum a working Centos install. This is the first constructive responce to our dillema and I give you kudos.

williamconley wrote:You sound like a guy who SHOULD be sponsoring a 64-bit CentOS .iso release. but a STAGNANT one capable of upgrading later, but not "install the latest greatest". install a snapshot so "later upgrades" (which inevitably break functionality) can be ignored as of the moment "the break" occurs.

what happens is that one creates the .iso install, and during installation the "latest" install happens and works fine. but two weeks later, Redhat/CentOS makes a ... small change in an obscure package that borks a perl package deep inside Vicidial and now the system won't run right (unstable, bad voice, no dispo screen, something stupider each time and harder to track down).

So a static install (with the Option to upgrade) ... requires that everything be contained on the install DVD (not CD, not enough room). That being possible, of course, doesn't mean anyone has been paid to do it. Kumba did it, but of his own free will (and because it generates revenue, of course, and then only 32-bit).

Maybe we'll do it after the Ubuntu. Assuming Kumba doesn't dive in.

Hello Guys,

A really nice project for OpenSuSE vicibox sin that is not one of the systems that I love. I would have preferred Slackware or Debian maximum