• Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by IMTheNachoMan

  1. And that is fine -- that it works for you. I was sharing feedback that it doesn't work for me. And I'm nothing special or unique. If it doesn't work for me then there are other folks like me that it doesn't work for. I understand if nobody wants to make the change because there aren't enough folks like me -- that's just how it is when you're in the minority group. But I wanted to raise the feedback so others who feel like me can chime in -- that would give a true sense of what majority vs minority opinion.
  2. Fair. But I also think the current way results in less members willing to help out where they can cause they have to figure out what comment goes to what in a multi-page thread. I will be honest, I personally can probably help a lot of folks with some of the questions they have but I don't have time to read through multiple pages to see who said what, why, etc... The way other support forums do it, from what I've seen, is by using tags or prefixing post titles using some standard so you can filter on what you care about. Or is it possible to create sub-sub forums specific for each Docker conainer? Or take Docker container support off of Unraid forums and to their GitHub repo or something? GitHub issues kinda makes more sense to me anyway.
  3. Could just use tags or container name as prefix for submission title? I think the issue is that Unraid forums are probably not the best place to manage support threads.
  4. Each issue/question should get its own thread. Yes, this might result in duplicates but as a user/consumer, duplicate information is a lot better than weeding through 200+ comments to find what I need. The question is, do we want to make it easier for Unraid forum admins, or Unraid users. Alternatively, if folks are putting their container images in GitHub then we can direct folks to use that -- cause then they can create a new issue for each question.
  5. Right now there is one support thread for a Docker container and everyone uses that. It is quite chaotic. It would make more sense to use one thread for each issue. Otherwise it is so hard to trace a discussion on one specific issue.
  6. I know how it gets enabled and can do what you're saying but I'd rather find the file in the boot image, or whatever it is, and edit is, so the line is not commented out by default. So I guess my question is, how can I alter the boot image to make changes to core/system files stick?
  7. I am using the built-in FTP server. It used to be enabled on reboot. Now on 6.10 it seems to always be disabled on reboot and I have to enable it manually. From what I can tell in 6.10 the ftp line is commented out in /etc/inetd.con How can I change that and have it persist on reboot? And yes, I know about the security issues with it but I've created a patch/fix that already fixes those issues.
  8. You are welcome. Right now you can't. You have to create a new one using the command line interface from the Docker shell. But I like the idea of mapping the config file to the OS one. I'll add that feature.
  9. No. I created a Docker container for the GUI. It has some bugs/issues with creating new configs but it works for browsing existing ones.
  10. First, I know we shouldn't use the built-in FTP server (vsftpd) because of security reasons but I actually added an enhancement that addresses those security risks. I'm waiting for them to merge my pull request ( into the codebase but until then I am using it. I have all logging disabled in /etc/vsftpd but for some reason it is still logging to /var/log/syslog and I can't figure out why. root@unraid:/etc# cat /etc/vsftpd.conf # vsftpd.conf for unRAID # with suggestions from forum user 'nars' # connect_from_port_20=NO write_enable=YES local_root=/mnt local_umask=0 # # No anonymous logins anonymous_enable=NO # # Allow only local vsftpd.user_list users to log in. local_enable=YES userlist_enable=YES userlist_deny=NO userlist_file=/boot/config/vsftpd.user_list check_shell=NO # # Logging to syslog syslog_enable=NO log_ftp_protocol=NO xferlog_enable=NO # # Misc. dirmessage_enable=NO ls_recurse_enable=YES listen=NO seccomp_sandbox=NO chroot_local_user=YES allow_writeable_chroot=YES user_config_dir=/boot/config/vsftpd.user_config_dir pasv_min_port=10090 pasv_max_port=10100 Excerpt from /var/log/syslog: Apr 5 21:03:14 unraid vsftpd[4248]: connect from ( Apr 5 21:03:24 unraid vsftpd[4285]: connect from ( Apr 5 21:03:34 unraid vsftpd[4342]: connect from ( Apr 5 21:03:45 unraid vsftpd[4475]: connect from ( Apr 5 21:03:55 unraid vsftpd[4521]: connect from ( Apr 5 21:04:05 unraid vsftpd[4613]: connect from ( Apr 5 21:04:16 unraid vsftpd[4653]: connect from ( Apr 5 21:04:26 unraid vsftpd[4691]: connect from ( Apr 5 21:04:36 unraid vsftpd[4747]: connect from ( Apr 5 21:04:47 unraid vsftpd[4782]: connect from ( Apr 5 21:04:57 unraid vsftpd[5111]: connect from ( Apr 5 21:05:08 unraid vsftpd[5201]: connect from ( Apr 5 21:05:18 unraid vsftpd[5244]: connect from ( Apr 5 21:05:28 unraid vsftpd[5297]: connect from ( Apr 5 21:05:39 unraid vsftpd[5358]: connect from ( Apr 5 21:05:49 unraid vsftpd[5400]: connect from ( Apr 5 21:05:59 unraid vsftpd[5441]: connect from ( Apr 5 21:06:10 unraid vsftpd[5526]: connect from ( Apr 5 21:06:20 unraid vsftpd[5569]: connect from ( Apr 5 21:06:30 unraid vsftpd[5610]: connect from ( Apr 5 21:06:41 unraid vsftpd[5667]: connect from ( Apr 5 21:06:51 unraid vsftpd[5709]: connect from ( Apr 5 21:07:01 unraid vsftpd[5776]: connect from ( Apr 5 21:07:12 unraid vsftpd[5853]: connect from (
  11. I was thinking the same thing. I released a Docker container CA for running rclone's native GUI but I'm hitting some challenges with it for creating a new config -- can't get the backend authentication windows to open in a new tab. Running rclone as a 1st world service directly on unRAID would be better I think. I was thinking to update this plugin or write a new one to run the gui as a service.
  12. I was able to get it added to the app store. Search for nordlynx.
  13. Thanks all! I just wanted to make sure we have a path forward when we add new servers.
  14. Can't. Long story. Security issue. Basically, once USB stick is plugged into a machine, it can't be used on another machine and then back on the first machine. Requirement by security team.
  15. We're thinking of running some unRAID servers in our LAN and they wouldn't have any internet access -- in or out. With our network configuration we wouldn't even be able to give them internet access through an exception or anything. How will registering new unRAID servers work with the forum registration process? No forum login will work since there is no internet access.
  16. How exactly does one publish something to the store?
  17. I can do that but I don't know how. Do you know? Can you please point me in the right direction?
  18. For those who want to use NordLynx container on unRAID, I put a guide together at .
  19. I see. So for this container I am passing network to another container using --net:container=... So then if I want to change the application's ports I have to do it from within the SabNZBD app, right?
  20. I have changed the port from 8080 to 8081 for my Sabnzbd container but unRAID still shows 8080. I am able to access it on 8081 as expected but for some reason it still shows 8080 on the unRAID screen. Anyone know what is wrong?
  21. I have an unRAID server with one 4 TB HDD. There is nothing wrong with it. I don't need that much space so I want to swap it with a 2 TB HDD I have. My thought is to put the 2 TB in an external enclosure, plug it into my unRAID server, do a data transfer, then swap the 4 TB with the 2 TB. But I assume there are some additional steps I gotta do? How do I make sure the data I copied to the 2 TB from the 4 TB isn't lost when I add it to unRAID.
  22. Hello all. I've got a few questions I'm stuck on. Is killswitch enabled by default? I think I read it is handled by iptables but I'm not clear. The container documentation says we need to use NET_ADMIN and NET_RAW. In unRAID, it auto added NET_ADMIN but not NET_RAW. Do we need to add NET_RAW? Some posts say NordLynx doesn't work, some say it does. Should we use NordLynx or OpenVPN? I was reading that NordVPN doesn't do well with torrenting (seeding) for some countries/types and that in proxy mode it will leak your IP. What are folks putting for Location/CONNECT? I read that only P2P works for torrenting but P2P doesn't hide IP. Just a tad bit confused on what I should use.