-
Posts
480 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Store
Gallery
Bug Reports
Documentation
Landing
Report Comments posted by DivideBy0
-
-
I switched my TimeMachine to an old MacMini with an external drive. After 6.11.1 upgrade my UnRaid TimeMachine setup went belly up I am done trying
-
I am absolutely HATING this TimeMachine issue since my upgrade to 6.11.1 ABSOLUTELY HATE IT
I got it to work for a while and now it stoped again. I deleted my entire backup and redo another one, it worked for few days and now stoped again. I NEVER EVER had these issues in 6.9.2 and I am seriously contemplating to going back to 6.9.2 just for this major issue.
This is what I get on my client side, MacBook 16 running Ventura 13.1
eXile:~ root# log show --predicate 'subsystem == "com.apple.TimeMachine"' --info | grep 'upd: (' | cut -c 1-19,140-999
2022-12-27 22:26:18al] Starting manual backup
2022-12-27 22:26:18ing] Rejecting candidate mount point: /Volumes/TimeMachine, not owned by root
2022-12-27 22:26:18ing] Attempting to mount 'smb://exile@NAS-UNRAID-1._smb._tcp.local/TimeMachine'
2022-12-27 22:26:21al] Initial network volume options for 'TimeMachine' {disablePrimaryReconnect: 0, disableSecondaryReconnect: 0, reconnectTimeOut: 0, QoS: 0x0, attributes: 0x1C}
2022-12-27 22:26:21al] Configured network volume options for 'TimeMachine' {disablePrimaryReconnect: 0, disableSecondaryReconnect: 0, reconnectTimeOut: 30, QoS: 0x20, attributes: 0x1C}
2022-12-27 22:26:21ing] Mounted 'smb://exile@NAS-UNRAID-1._smb._tcp.local/TimeMachine' at '/Volumes/.timemachine/NAS-UNRAID-1._smb._tcp.local/33BC8F3D-CD01-4C98-813F-A6F208765B20/TimeMachine' (34.87 TB of 40 TB available)
2022-12-27 22:26:22al] Skipping periodic backup verification: not needed for an APFS sparsebundle
2022-12-27 22:26:23al] 'eXiled.sparsebundle' does not need resizing - current logical size is 38 TB (37,997,448,629,248 bytes), size limit is 38 TB (37,997,448,629,657 bytes)
2022-12-27 22:26:23al] Mountpoint '/Volumes/.timemachine/NAS-UNRAID-1._smb._tcp.local/33BC8F3D-CD01-4C98-813F-A6F208765B20/TimeMachine' is still valid
2022-12-27 22:26:23al] Checking for runtime corruption on '/Volumes/.timemachine/NAS-UNRAID-1._smb._tcp.local/33BC8F3D-CD01-4C98-813F-A6F208765B20/TimeMachine/eXiled.sparsebundle'
2022-12-27 22:27:06ight] Waiting for Spotlight to finish indexing '/Volumes/Backups of eXiled'
2022-12-27 22:27:10mages] Failed to attach using DiskImages2 to url '/Volumes/.timemachine/NAS-UNRAID-1._smb._tcp.local/33BC8F3D-CD01-4C98-813F-A6F208765B20/TimeMachine/eXiled.sparsebundle', error: Error Domain=NSPOSIXErrorDomain Code=19 "Operation not supported by device" UserInfo={DIErrorVerboseInfo=Failed to initialize IO manager: Failed opening folder for entries reading}
2022-12-27 22:27:10al] Failed to unmount '/Volumes/.timemachine/NAS-UNRAID-1._smb._tcp.local/33BC8F3D-CD01-4C98-813F-A6F208765B20/TimeMachine', Disk Management error: {
2022-12-27 22:27:10al] Failed to unmount '/Volumes/.timemachine/NAS-UNRAID-1._smb._tcp.local/33BC8F3D-CD01-4C98-813F-A6F208765B20/TimeMachine', error: Error Domain=com.apple.diskmanagement Code=0 "No error" UserInfo={NSDebugDescription=No error, NSLocalizedDescription=No Error.}
2022-12-27 22:27:10al] Waiting 60 seconds and trying again.
2022-12-27 22:27:10llation] Cancelling backup because volume '/Volumes/.timemachine/NAS-UNRAID-1._smb._tcp.local/33BC8F3D-CD01-4C98-813F-A6F208765B20/TimeMachine' was unmounted.
2022-12-27 22:27:10llation] Requested backup cancellation or termination
2022-12-27 22:27:11llation] Backup cancelled (22: BACKUP_CANCELED)
2022-12-27 22:27:11al] Failed to unmount '/Volumes/.timemachine/NAS-UNRAID-1._smb._tcp.local/33BC8F3D-CD01-4C98-813F-A6F208765B20/TimeMachine', Disk Management error: {
2022-12-27 22:27:11al] Failed to unmount '/Volumes/.timemachine/NAS-UNRAID-1._smb._tcp.local/33BC8F3D-CD01-4C98-813F-A6F208765B20/TimeMachine', error: Error Domain=com.apple.diskmanagement Code=0 "No error" UserInfo={NSDebugDescription=No error, NSLocalizedDescription=No Error.}
2022-12-27 22:27:11llation] Cleared pending cancellation request
eXile:~ root#
-
1
-
-
Is this still an issue? I am in 6.11.1 and I got this stale issue twice, with Safari and Firefox. What's going one here? Reboot fixed the problem. I got it when I stopped the array to make some changes and had to restart the array.
-
Well the question is where exactly do I add this line? What file do I need to edit?
-
Crap, I am in the same situation, deleted everything and still don;t work. I need to add this line and see if it makes a diference
fruit:metadata = stream
-
My TimeMachine got all screwed up after the 6.11.1 upgrade
I am redoing the backup on this MacBook 16 but my other 15 won't backup to its existing instance or a new instance. Very stubborn. I will wait for the 16 to finish and try the 15 one again. Something substantially changed in 6.11.1 that will cause this weird behavior?
So the 16" runs macOS Ventura and the 15" runs Big Sur if that makes a difference?
-
On 11/2/2021 at 12:06 AM, limetech said:
We are not going to remove it and your server functions identically whether you "sign in" or not, with exception of provisioning or renew of a Let's Encypt certificate, which evidently you are not interested in anyway. Nothing is being "pushed down anyone's throats". Just don't sign-in but nothing is exchanged which we don't already know (like your key/GUID) or that we care about (like your server name or LAN IP), those are transmitted for your convenience. Do you use Docker? Do you use plugins? Do you use automatic check for updates? Do you have NTP enabled? All those services contact resources on the internet. And honestly, we are lot more forthcoming in the nature of the data transfer happening than some of those might be.
Lastly, out of respect, if anyone wants to discuss this further, please create a separate topic to do so.
I created a separate topic but no formal answer from UnRaid?
-
12 minutes ago, SpencerJ said:
Thanks for feedback.
I encourage you to take a look at the Purchases section on our policies page and the My Servers wiki linked below.
There are a few inaccuracies in your comment. If you have other questions, my DMs are open.
Trust but verify. I disagree with most of the this but this is not the forum to prove you're wrong nor start peeling the onion on your architecture and code, or security best practice and DP/GDPR privacy regulations
Policies or disclosures don't mean jack when a breach happens and my data is all over the places. Is just lawyer BS Think Ubiquity, SolarWinds, just to list a few. Again I don't want to get into arguments here.
-
44 minutes ago, NLS said:
Since you mention "for others to see", I take it as giving me right to comment (after all it IS in a public forum). So let me comment on this after reading your original post too.
Every paying customers is entitled to an opinion and I am sure there are others that feel the same way about this intrusive feature but just prefer not to be confrontational. I am not here to say "please" mate, I am here to be direct. Most of your statements don't stand:
2. Where in my post do you see me being your representative and speaking for you all? Most of the times I say "I". It is not my intention to speak or represent anybody else.
4. I din't ask them to be grateful, I asked them to stop intruding my privacy and my security. Forcing me to connect and link to their cloud service with identifiable IP and other personal information linked in the cloud backend ( license, credit card, address, name, etc, etc) is a big NO NO in my books. Besides I would like to stay off the grid with my unRaid from the moment I downloaded my license key. That was the initial model and what they're doing now is a major paradigm switch.
6. The license should provide me with the benefit of upgrades and I expect a balanced approach to features vs security and privacy. The reality here is that they're paving the way for a subscription model which will not work without this kind of cloud ecosystem, that's all it boils down to. I don't care for subscription either but that's for the new users to worry about it.
7. Most likely I will have to hack my way around the .js files and remove it myself but I shouldn't have to do that. Why is so hard to have toggle switch and take it off the webGUI?
8. Again I am not in the business of "please" and I am not sure if I appreciate your OCD statement. Seems a bit rude and arrogant. I didn't insult anyone in my posts and I expect the same
-
On 11/2/2021 at 12:06 AM, limetech said:
We are not going to remove it ...
Lastly, out of respect, if anyone wants to discuss this further, please create a separate topic to do so.
As I keep reflecting on your answer and position I actually don't like your tone and the way you treat you customers at all. You're the opposite of humble or grateful for our business / $$$ and you show no intention to listen or to find a work around. Is pretty much my way or the high way. Business 1:1 if I may, this tone of yours, one day will karma right back at you. I think I already know the outcome of this request or conversation so I give up but not before calling you out on this as I really really DON'T LIKE IT...... Just for the record and for others to see
-
On 11/2/2021 at 12:06 AM, limetech said:
Lastly, out of respect, if anyone wants to discuss this further, please create a separate topic to do so.
I don't believe there is lack of respect here and as a paying customer we should be able to politely voice concerns, frustration, suggestions as well as the positive experiences.
That being said what venue do you suggest to post these kind of concerns where actually is visible enough and you may actually end up doing something about it. I feel like this is going to be buried somewhere and nothing will be done about it. Call me a Debbie downer if you may
but this is really a deal breaker for me as I refuse to put anything on your cloud, despite all your arguments on other dockers or plugins traffic. What's next? a risk assessment and pcaping your traffic? Or the I told you so "ubiquity" cloud breach fiasco? Just give people the option to opt out and take off the sign in from the webUI, such a simple, elegant fix
-
1
-
-
24 minutes ago, itimpi said:
Since the UPC seems to be stirring up a lot of adverse reaction, maybe the easiest option is to set up a setting under either Settings->Identification or Settings->Management Access (whichever is deemed most appropriate) to remove the Login prompt from the top of the GUI?
It can then be defaulted to Enabled until explicitly disabled by the user so new users see it is an option. That might also help with making it clearer that this is purely an optional feature
I would LOVE that, great suggestion mate
Such a simple and elegant fix....
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, HellDiverUK said:
I sincerely hope that the UPC remains optional. I will not be using this, after the total disaster caused by a similar scheme employed by Ubiquiti. Mandatory signon using their cloud, which was promptly hacked exposing hundreds of thousands of user details.
One of the main reasons I use unRAID is so I'm self-sufficient without the need of cloud-based logins, and also so I have as little user data out there as possible.
I was a victim of the same issue. Ubiquity did listen to its customer and now offers an off the grid / stand alone option as they should.
-
2
-
-
With all due respect, have you addressed the UPC / login option located in the upper right of the webGUI header? Give us an option to take it off, remove it? I don't care to log in, I don't care for the cloud intrusion in my personal life, I don't care to see it, full stop period, regardless of your business case. And I am very unhappy how some of these intrusive feature are being pushed down our throats. I just want it off my GUI header and I don't want anything to do with unraid cloud service as working offline (OFF THE GRID) is my primary priority. Can we have that option?
-
3
-
-
8 minutes ago, limetech said:
Yes a detailed doc is forthcoming. It's going to say: if you have not installed the 'My Servers' plugin then no interaction with outside servers takes place with one exception:
- If you download a Let's Encrypt SSL cert then a background daemon is activated which updates the DNS A-record on our DNS server, and also wakes up every 24 hours to see if time to auto-renew the cert. If you don't want this to happen, then don't download a LE cert.
Note you can always create a new Forum account during the Sign-in/Sign-up process dedicated to this purpose.
Thank you Sir and looking forward more details. Cheers
-
Can I please ask limetech for some FAQ or written details around the existing users / licenses behaviors / expectations / changes in light of this upgrade? Is really not clear to me who does what, just assumptions at this point.
I for one, will opt out from associating any of my licenses with this forum credentials and that's a show stopper for me. I value my privacy and my control more than any social or cloud services and I will not sign my life away down the road to some vague license agreement. Not pointing at limetech but tech history proved over and over again that we're going down a very slippery slope when extend our own devices over some fashion of cloud services. I simply don't trust that model, full, stop, period.
This is not what I signed up for and I would like to keep it that way. I can appreciate some of the business benefits explained and I respect that, but also one have to respect our privacy.
-
3
-
1
-
-
Someone please help me understand this? What if I don't wanna associate my keys and my home installs with my unraid forum account? I really like my privacy honestly and what is is my home have no business being associated with any cloud or external servers. This is a very slippery slope and I just don't like it. Is there an option to continue be offline just the way I am right now? I just don't want to be part of this new ecosystem unraid is creating. I trust my privacy and I trust no one, I am sorry..... And there’s absolutely no reason why you can’t support both ways of activating / running unraid. I should not be forced to connect with you if I have a valid key.
"UPC and My Servers Plugin
The most visible new feature is located in the upper right of the webGUI header. We call this the User Profile Component, or UPC. The UPC allows a user to associate their server(s) and license key(s) with their Unraid Community forum account.
Starting with this release, it will be necessary for a new user to either sign-in with existing forum credentials or sign-up, creating a new account via the UPC in order to download a Trial key. All key purchases and upgrades are also handled exclusively via the UPC"
-
11
-
1
-
I am redoing the backup on this MacBook 16 but my other 15 won't backup to its existing instance or a new instance. Very stubborn. I will wait for the 16 to 
Policies or disclosures don't mean jack when a breach happens and my data is all over the places. Is just lawyer BS 
[6.8.3] shfs error results in lost /mnt/user
in Stable Releases
Posted
I have the same issue now, almost daily