user-115
-
Posts
5 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Store
Gallery
Bug Reports
Documentation
Landing
Posts posted by user-115
-
-
On 2/21/2024 at 7:58 AM, ich777 said:
In my oppinion it‘s up to the maintainer to mark a path as required in the template which is empty to force the user to either specify a path or remove the path from the template.
The same applies to devices that may be empty in the template, they should be also be marked by the maintainer from the template as required so that the user is, again, forced to fill it out or remove the device entry.
I do agree with that. It's that sometimes the maintainer doesn't factor that in, so it's helpful to have something like this already in the OS. Helpful for the end user, at least.
-
Good Lord, Thank you!
I thought I couldn't get FileBot reinstalled.But while this may not be a bug, this patch should be included in Unraid by default.
-
On 12/2/2023 at 1:37 PM, user-115 said:
To anybody who finds this thread.
As of 12/02/2023, NUT is NOT compatible with UnRaid v6.12.6, and it will be automatically removed upon upgrading.
When this compatibility issue is fixed, please reply to my comment saying it's fixed.Just wanted to get this on here in case anyone is thinking of upgrading UnRaid, and wants to keep NUT.
At this point, NUT is working again.
However, it's worth noting that I had followed the instructions for manual installation beforehand.
This time around, it was available in the Apps section, and now works well. Better than before, because now NUT comes up on my dashboard, instead of just the bottom of the window.Definitely my go to for UPS management.
-
1
-
-
To anybody who finds this thread.
As of 12/02/2023, NUT is NOT compatible with UnRaid v6.12.6, and it will be automatically removed upon upgrading.
When this compatibility issue is fixed, please reply to my comment saying it's fixed.Just wanted to get this on here in case anyone is thinking of upgrading UnRaid, and wants to keep NUT.
-
2
-
[Plugin] Docker Patch 6.12.8
in Plugin Support
Posted
I didn't think of it from that perspective, I do agree with that. What I meant was that this patch should be a native part of the OS instead of a third party patch, so there is no error at all.