• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About grahamr

  • Rank


  • Gender
  1. Not really a support thread as such, but i looked in all the news threads, and there was not one for this article, and i was wondering if there was any official update? Also, the first point about easily enabling SSL for local sessions, somehow i must have missed that as i can't find that option for the life of me on 6.6.7 thanks!
  2. 5.5.24 came out on 10/4 - Wondering if there is an easy way to update this docker on my end? I don't want to switch to the other one that is on 5.6 builds. i see the docker file pulls the cURL - could you have the version number of build as an advanced variable so you don't need to rebuild every time (or a user could lock a certain version in?)
  3. Yeah, so the issue i have is there was a short window when the docker was pushing a 5.5.x build - Not sure of the steps to get back on the 5.4 builds, as well if i can even do that while retaining settings. or if i can somehow get up to 5.5.11?
  4. Ok - so looks like 5.4.11 is still the stable build - any idea if i can downgrade to that? - i noticed that with 5.5.5 the AP is only seeing, and not 3.7.55 for software. Im hesitant to flash to 3.7.55 manually in case there is an issue on the controller side with that build.
  5. Hey no worries!!! Thanks for the awesome work. I just thought I was going crazy when I couldn't find the release notes and then worried I did something! :-)
  6. I got a container upgrade notice today, backed up, upgraded and restored as usual - noticed I'm on 5.5.5 unstable. Is there anyway to limit only stable releases?
  7. it does suck - this was reported in the 6.2 Beta 21 back in may - it never should have made it to production, and there should be a large warning on the 6.2 upgrade for AMD users - i would not have moved to 6.2 if i had known.
  8. likewise - I'm on an older chip (AMD 245) but i can't even MAKE a vm at this point, i get the error as soon as i hit create (OpenELEC, ubuntu, Ubuntu Server, etc) VM creation error internal error: process exited while connecting to monitor: warning: host doesn't support requested feature: CPUID.80000001H:EDX [bit 0] warning: host doesn't support requested feature: CPUID.80000001H:EDX [bit 1] warning: host doesn't support requested feature: CPUID.80000001H:EDX [bit 2] warning: host doesn't support requested feature: CPUID.80000001H:EDX [bit 3] warning: host doesn't support requested fea
  9. yep, i forgot to do this.. that was a fun one trying to figure out what was going on at 2 am the other day. haha
  10. Thats the route im looking at now too - Its bizzare how the card "seems" to work though. i poke at it a bit more this weekend
  11. I've got a highpoint rocketraid 642L v2 that's running the same chip, likewise I have a single drive connected, as jbod, and it seems like the card is not detecting. I'm debating doing a quick 6.0 test (still on 5.06) to see if it works out of the box. Does anyone else have experience with either of these cards? Looks like I may have a different issue - lspci - v 02:00.0 RAID bus controller: HighPoint Technologies, Inc. Unknown device 0642 (rev 01) Subsystem: HighPoint Technologies, Inc. Unknown device 0642 Flags: bus master, fast devsel, latency 0, IRQ 10 I/O ports a
  12. Just as a point of reference - Using an old Dell laptop with WD 2G green drives, i had the following results - thats a pretty substantial time savings overall -for me on a 2tb drive its the difference between starting a preclear late at night, and being up and running the next evening vs the day after - so thanks!
  13. Yep, parity check is all good, no errors on anything at this point. I'll stop this when i get home from the office and then begin the slow process for the rebuild Thanks guys!
  14. So - I started a preclear on a drive while it was in an external usb enclosure - needless to say it has been SLOW (48hours for 2tb) its on the last step, the post read- rather than wait the additional 24+ hours to finish, can i stop the process, pop the drive out of the enclosure and resume once on the sata bus? Also, the drive will be a new parity drive - so would it need to finish the post-read step for that? Would assigning it take the array offline for the clear if i dont let the preclear finish? the reason i ask is that the remaining disks are at about 95% and getting this 2tb
  15. Thanks for the followup - i did a fair bit of digging and found a whack of posts like that fedora one. for my goal on this box i dont want anything that isnt solid, so i went the easier route - card is back at the store and i picked up a new working pcix gig card ill mark this one closed/resolved/solved! thanks for the reply!