eweitzman

As I documented in this general support thread, unraid 6.9.1 requires the root account to have a password for many functions to work. I've been able to run unraid with no root password (and without the friction this causes) for over a decade. Nothing in my circumstances or practices has required changing this now. A root password is required by ssh samba connections from windows 10 web UI Root passwords are not required by telnet console access Please either revert to the behavior of previous unraid builds that don't require a root password, or make this configurable. Thanks, - Eric

There's no good reason to force security enhancements on users who do not want/need them. I've been able to run unraid with no root password (and no friction) for over a decade. Nothing in my circumstances or practices has required changing this now.

@John_M - Thanks for taking the time to point this out in the release notes. (They've moved to https://wiki.unraid.net/Manual/Release_Notes/Unraid_OS_6.9.0#SSH_Improvements now.) This explains what I've discovered re ssh requiring that root have a password, but doesn't explain either why this is now required nor why other avenues of access (telnet, web UI, samba) do or don't require it. I'll have to find out how to register a complaint with management. Thanks, - Eric

I've just found another use case where a non-existent root password is required: browsing samba drives from windows. Arg!

Thanks. I'll check it out tomorrow after a parity check completes.

It's only required by 6.9.1's build or config of rsh/ssh, and not required in other places. Can this be configured by the user? Why the change?

I have no password on the unraid root account. rsh/ssh prompt for the password and will not log in when the enter key is pressed. This is new behavior in 6.9.1: I have been using ssh for root without a password successfully like forever. telnet connects without requiring a password. The GUI itself opens without requiring a password. The web GUI console opens without requiring a password. Any suggestions? Thanks, - Eric

The os returns "No such file or directory" when I try to put unraid to sleep by this command: echo 3 > /proc/acpi/sleep The directory is there and appears to be writable. The file "wakeup" is there. I can cd to /proc/acpi. I get the same error trying to create any file in /proc/acpi. User is root: sudo shows no difference. This is behaving as if the directory or partition is read-only. root@unraid:/proc/acpi# pwd /proc/acpi root@unraid:/proc/acpi# whoami root root@unraid:/proc/acpi# echo 3 > sleep bash: sleep: No such file or directory root@unraid:/proc/acpi# touch x touch: cannot touch 'x': No such file or directory root@unraid:/proc/acpi# ls -ld ../acpi drwxrwxrwx 3 root root 0 Apr 3 12:27 ../acpi/ I have the Dynamix S3 Sleep plugin installed. The sleep menu item in the GUI header does not cause the system to sleep. Any suggestions? Thanks, - Eric

Hi. I'm a longtime developer, new to development on slackware. Discovered pkgtools is the package manager. But it seems that the gui program pkgtool is missing from unraid 4.7.2. The other pkg commands {remove, install, etc}pkg are here and running. So I pulled pkgtool out of the lastest package distibution at http://ftp.slackware.com/pub/slackware/slackware64-current/slackware64/a/pkgtools-15.0-noarch-28.txz, put it in /sbin with the other *pkg files, chmod +x, installed dialog, et voila, I have pkgtool for the moment -- at least until the next reboot. pkgtools-15.0-no-arch-23 is installed on my machine. I haven't found an archive of all older versions of slackware packages yet, so I can't confirm whether pkgtools-15.0-noarch-23 was missing pkgtool or not, but the source code for slackware 14.2 (2016) does have it, and the web is littered with references to it. So I expect it should be present. This has caused me to wonder, not only if Lime has removed this package for some reason (anyone know?) and I shouldn't install the latest pkgtools, but how can I know if installing some random package will interfere with unraid itself? Thanks, - Eric

I skipped 6.4.1 and went to 6.5 and have two drives with crc errors. Would you mind describing how to acknowledge them? I see the crc counts in the smart listing on the affected drives' pages highlighted in orange, but there are no buttons, etc, to acknowledge the error. Thanks, - Eric

Will updating a drive's firmware cause any data loss? If not, is it safe to update the firmware if the drive is part of the array? That is, will any portions of the disk be changed (such as a signature) that would invalidate parity? In case the answer depends on the drive/manufacturer, I'd like to update a WD Red WD60EFRX from version 68MYMN0 to 68MYMN1. Thanks, - Eric

Interesting advice, but has rfs really rotted such that it's no longer usable? This 6TB drive has 750GB free so the "nearly full" theory doesn't apply. I have several other 6TB drives that *are* nearly full but have never had rfs problems. In fact, this is the only time I've seen this problem in seven years of using rfswith unRAID. The array has been up and moving data around, including from/to this disk, for about 12 hours now. Mystery.

Update: The extended SMART test shows no errors.

A 6TB Red Pro drive with ~1000 hours has twice had write failures and reiserfs problems while running mover and once for no reason that's apparent to me. SMART short test shows no problems. About 2 weeks ago while running overnight, mover caused several thousand reiserfs errors and unraid red-balled the drive. reiserfsck --check informed me to run --rebuild-tree. This took a very long time (10+ hours?) with the array in maintenance mode. All looked well afterwards, until a day later under normal use, unraid red-balled the drive again but without reiserfs errors. I replaced cables and moved the drive to a different controller and used data-rebuild to bring the drive back online. 11M writes and 15 hours later, the array came up and worked normally. Then, when running the mover, it failed again with reiserfs errors. Is there any other way to further diagnose this problem besides running a long SMART check? Thanks, - Eric

Yes. I used user "unraid-sync".

I noticed that I missed a "5" in one of the port mappings. It's now "55555". Restarted the docker, it required that I re-enter my license, but still can't access my /sync folder. This is the docker command now: root@localhost:# /usr/local/emhttp/plugins/dynamix.docker.manager/scripts/docker run -d --name="ResilioSync" --net="bridge" -e TZ="America/Los_Angeles" -e HOST_OS="unRAID" -e "PUID"="99" -e "PGID"="100" -p 8888:8888/tcp -p 55555:55555/tcp -v "/mnt/disk1/ResilioSync":"/sync":rw linuxserver/resilio-sync 681779083c4b4f12353f7b043d9c782d1c5790e22475ce44a948a35eb8845c5a

I would like my /sync folder to be inside the array, not on the cache drive. To that end, I set /sync to /mnt/disk1/ResilioSync, created the directory, made sure user:group was 99:100. When I try to create a manual folder connection, enter a key pasted from sync on another machine, and use the path in the "Connect to folder" dialog as set by they share/key to /sync/docs (for example) and press "Connect", the dialog says "Sync Home does not have permission to access this folder." What am I doing wrong? Thanks, - Eric

When I first started using unraid, I bought into the notion that storage solutions like this could run on any ol' hardware you had lying around unused in a closet. unraid upped the ante by being able to use any ol' disks. While this was and still is all true, I discovered it also led to much frustration in terms of low speed, wildly varying transfer rates, and mysterious long random waits and freezes. In spite of these frustrations, it was perfect for what it did at a very low entry cost. I just had to temper my expectations and appreciate the job it did. A few months ago, I bought a beefy mb/cpu/ram combo from user @KeeWay. It's a gigabyte server mb with 32GB ram and a fast Xeon cpu, $1K of 3-4 year old technology for about $300. The new machine is a real pleasure. It is liberating to actually be able to work directly against files on the array without huge delays and freezes such as when editing metadata. I had basically given up on doing anything other that copying files to the array and playing them from the old machine. Of course, I would make minor ad hoc changes, but now unraid storage behaves almost as well as local disk on my desktop. There is still the occasional delay when creating files, but that is rare now instead of typical. I was in the process of coalescing many old smaller slower drives into 6TB drives in the months before I got the new hardware and finished that project recently. With the drives on two PCI-e SAS cards in this beefy machine, things like parity check regularly average about 100MB/s, peaking at 140MB/s. Next I'll see just how fast data can move from an SSD on my desktop to the array using a pair of 10G ethernet cards (ebay pulls). I might have upgrade the cache to SSD to fully exploit this. A whole level of frustration and compromise has gone away after graduating to better hardware. - Eric

I just redid steps 10-13. I believe I must have pressed "Done" in the New Config page without pressing "Apply" first. Now, after pressing both buttons, every device on the main page has a blue square indicating "new device" in hover tips and the "Parity is already valid" checkbox is present. One suggestion for improvement: After checking the "Parity is already valid" checkbox, the warning up top beside the parity disk should change from "ALL DATA ON THIS DISK WILL BE ERASED WHEN ARRAY IS STARTED" to some other message indicating it will be preserved. The array has started with my old disk gone. Time to start a parity check to be sure. Thanks!

I've almost completed removing a drive using the method described here: https://lime-technology.com/wiki/index.php/Shrink_array#Alternate_Procedure_for_Linux_proficient_users. I am absolutely certain that I have unmounted, cleared, and unassigned the correct drive. A problem occurs in step 14, "Click the check box for Parity is already valid, make sure it is checked!" There is no such checkbox on the main page. There is the following checkbox after I unassigned the zeroed out drive: The server is running version 6.3.2.

This came to me by email with a promo code (ESCAKAK23). I don't believe the promo code is specific to me because it shows up in the listing for the drive. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822145973 - Eric

I order this drive and got the $25 off for using Paypal. The cost was $235 delivered - no shipping, no tax. What a deal! The drive is in a retail blister pack, the blister pack is in a 12"x15"x6" box with air-filled bags that are completely flat. The bags have small tears in them from the sharp edges of the blister pack. The blister pack itself has bent corners and one part is compressed. The drive has undergone lots of impacts from UPS and USPS handling. It may have been a good drive when shipped, but probably has been subjected to G forces out of spec. It's going back. What a disappointment.

How do you get $25 off using Paypal?

I get this error trying to install serviio: root@unraid:/boot/plugins# installplg serviio-1.4-1jr-cache.plg installing plugin: serviio-1.4-1jr-cache file /boot/packages/jre-7u2-i586.txz: downloading from http://dl.dropbox.com/u/73389880/jre-files/jre-7u2-i586.txz ... Cookie coming from dl.dropboxusercontent.com attempted to set domain to dl.dropboxusercontent.com Cookie coming from dl.dropboxusercontent.com attempted to set domain to dl.dropboxusercontent.com ERROR: cannot verify dl.dropboxusercontent.com's certificate, issued by `/C=US/O=DigiCert Inc/OU=www.digicert.com/CN=DigiCert SHA2 High Assurance Server CA': Unable to locally verify the issuer's authority. To connect to dl.dropboxusercontent.com insecurely, use `--no-check-certificate'. I can't connect with --no-check-certificate because the package installer is issuing the commands. This thread describes how to update certificates: http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=31619.0 However, the certificates it installs are over a year old and I don't know where to find a newer set of certificates that might have an updated dropbox certificate. Any advice would be appreciated. - Eric

The new config operation and read-only parity check with the old 3TB parity drive are complete. The parity check immediately showed 1867 sync errors (Main | Array Operations page), then completed a half day later with no more sync errors. There were zero disk errors (Main | Array Devices page). syslog showed about 40 parity errors, one in sector 128 and all the rest in consecutive sectors (counting by starting at sector 12584. All the top level directories look like they should and the drives look as full as they should. So it looks like my data is intact, with possibly a bit of loss or a bit of bad parity. Next is to run smart tests and maybe reiserfsckd. Then I'll start over, pre-clear and install the new 6TB parity drive. Thanks for all the hand holding.