JonathanM

Use this http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/product_cd_key_viewer.html to retrieve your converted key after you upgrade to 10. Theoretically you can then use that key to reinstall 10 clean if necessary. (I have not personally tried this. The intarwebs seem to think it will work though.)

Its use is in the description. RTFM (At least it is in DelugeVPN, I don't use SABnzbdVPN but I assume he reused most of the same text.)

More of a dockerMan issue than binhex's. Never really noticed, but 6.2 may stop you from duplicating ports (it at least shows you which host ports are already in use). Regardless of which version you're running, the docker run command would have pointed out the same error through the GUI at the bottom when adding / reinstalling / editing. I hope that duplicate ports would be allowed, but noted as an error condition when you try to start a second instance if the first is already running. I have a couple dockers running individually that use the same port, and sharing other resources. I only ever want to run one at a time for obvious reasons, but I don't want to have to change the port settings to shuffle them around to use the same host port for each.

Limetech already has the infrastructure to offer optional array start denial. The V6 beta already requires connection to the mothership to verify key eligibility before the array will start, so if there was a market for it, I'm sure they would be willing to implement an optional feature that would use the same system to blacklist stolen keys. They say the phone home will be removed in the released version, and I have no reason to doubt that, but it's possible they could turn it into a marketable feature. It shouldn't be too hard to leave the "feature" enabled by request for specific license keys. At least that way a thief wouldn't have a ready to use box. It's not in any way a substitution for encryption, but I can see a business use case.

Windows doesn't automatically install drivers for devices it doesn't have. Windows won't boot from a storage device that it doesn't have the drivers installed. Those two statements sum up your (and everyone else's) issue with moving an existing windows installation to a foreign hard drive controller type. You can solve this several ways. The wiki outlines one way, which is to temporarily set the boot drive to a slow compatible controller, and add a secondary volume using the fast virtio controller. Windows boots from the normal drive, sees the new hardware, and installs the drivers. Now that the drivers are installed, you can change the boot drive to virtio, and remove the temporary 2nd volume, as the necessary drivers are now installed in windows. Another way is to add the drivers manually into the windows install on the physical pc before you image it, or you can manually install them after booting the vm using the compatible controller. Adding the drivers manually is faster if you know how to do it, instead of futzing around with a second image.

Is there a reason the new update has .dev0 appended to the version number? "Deluge 1.3.12.dev0" vs "Deluge 1.3.12" Googling now to see if there is some obvious explanation. Edit: Should have googled first. http://forum.deluge-torrent.org/viewtopic.php?t=53717 Sounds like something that may cause issues with some private trackers, so maybe could it be edited out of the build? Thanks.

I had a momentary show stopper caused by unraid's failure to update the template when the author submits changes. My template did not contain the VPN_PROTOCOL variable, which is now required. Easily fixed, but I thought it would be good to document it here for the next poor soul who can't figure out why following a simple set of instructions that works for everyone else doesn't work for them.

Excellent question. I am not sure. They know that I am using a limetech docker. How can I test? Given the question asked, and answer given. I think only "They" will be able to tell you, whoever "They" are.

Will there be anything us end users need to do or be aware of in light of PIA's mandatory update of desktop clients and new openvpn config files? https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/forum/discussion/21779/we-are-removing-our-russian-presence

Ctrl+alt+shift opens the side menu and gives access to clipboard Whatever clipboard that menu is referring to doesn't seem to be the one that Calibre is using. Does it work for you? I highlighted and copied a block of text in Calibre, expecting the clipboard window to populate with what was copied, and the window remained blank. I pasted a block of text into the window, and right click pasted into the comment field for a book's metadata, but nothing pasted. What am I doing wrong?

Does the clipboard work to paste data into the Calibre-RDP docker? I can't seem to get it to accept a text copy paste from another browser window to the webrdp calibre window.

I have an idea that may require too major of an overhaul, but how about implementing granular user levels? If you don't log in, you can only view certain permitted areas, and no changes allowed. Logging in as a regular user, you can only change and view areas that the admin has given that user permissions. Log in as admin, you get full control, as well as access to user management. I'm envisioning a checkbox array, with users on one side and features on the other, and each intersection shows unchecked for invisible, half checked for view only, or fully checked for change. I can also see a use case where you want a specific user to only be able to start and stop a single app or vm, so maybe a subset for VM and docker apps with the same type of permission array. A user could be allowed to see the status of plex or emby or a specific VM, but not control it.

Checksum verification (Dynamix File Integrity Plugin is one way, Corz is another) and backups from which to restore a verified clean copy. In general, bitrot is pretty low on the scale of what causes you to need to restore from a backup. It's rare. Very rare. But backups are needed anyway, so it's nice to keep checksums around to verify content.

Not an android programmer, but I think the device ID is in the same permission group as call status, so if you ask for permission to use the id, it's going to set the whole group. Maybe figure out another way to get a unique identifier out of the info you already need? More likely though, if you want to use that particular crash reporter, it's going to need that permissions group set.

I'm speaking in generalities here, haven't done the process with this particular docker, but yes, the same approach would probably work. What you are missing is that you need to exec inside the docker container before issuing your command. Googling "unraid docker exec bash" without the quotes should give you a basic idea of what is needed.

supervisord.log in your appdata config folder. Inspect and scrub login credentials before posting.

Is VPN_ENABLED set to yes?

It's not strictly necessary to empty the disk, just that you have a copy elsewhere so that you don't mind the disk being empty after the process. Sometimes deleting the files off the disk takes a VERY long time, especially if you are transferring the files to another array disk, so it's quicker just to do a copy. After you start the array with the new file system type requested, the disk will show as unmountable, and you will be offered the option to format it. Other than those nits, your overview is fine.

When your VPN is correctly configured in the advanced settings, the WEBGUI will start when the container is started. If you are using PIA it's easy, if you are using another VPN service, you may have to jump through some hoops, and you may not get very good results. Read this thread from the beginning for more info.

Are you sure the VPN credentials you entered into the docker configuration are correct? The WEBUI won't start unless the VPN is started, or you disable the VPN portion.

True. If the hash matches, then they should be further processed with a binary compare before being presented as dupes. That would remove all doubt.

Yes, but case 2 specifically states they will be listed as dupes if the hash matches, regardless of path. I am very opposed to calling user file system name collisions dupes, as they very well could be different content. Consider that since only file on the lowest number disk will be exposed for editing, other files with the same name and path on other disks will likely be outdated. Naming collision is a much more accurate description of case 1, duplicate files accurately describes case 2.

A file is considered a duplicate when: 1. The same path+name appears on different disks, e.g. /mnt/disk1/myfolder/filename.txt /mnt/disk2/myfolder/filename.txt 2. Hash results of files are the same, regardless of the path+name of the file Since his example shows 4 files with matching hashes to 4 other files, why are there no duplicates found?

Which steps exactly? If you didn't do a parity sync, and instead told it to trust parity and are now doing a correcting check, that would explain the slowness. As a general rule, when you remove drives from the protected array, you can't trust parity and need to do a fresh parity build, then after that is complete you should do a check, correcting or non your choice.