Tucubanito07

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    387

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Tucubanito07

    [Support] Linuxserver.io - Radarr

    in Docker Containers

    Posted

    Hello all,

     

    I need some help with mapping. I can't seem to figure out how the mapping works on this container. I had it working with the binhex-radarr but encountered some issues and I am trying the linuxserver.io container. I keep getting this "You are using docker; download client Deluge places downloads in /data/completed but this directory does not appear to exist inside the container. Review your remote path mappings and container volume settings."

     

    Now I have searched, and I believe I got it right but for some reason the health check does not like it.

    On Radarr i have it like this: 

    image.thumb.png.84f6d13bf8183a2c6f3b6ace97a239f4.png

     

    Then on the binhex-deluge, I have it like this:

    image.thumb.png.bd96c7cfb7444c58f1fb5e65a2dd9e2b.png

     

    inside binhex-deluge, it is setup like this:

    image.png.eef5ea7e611f14b6848083944e480793.png

     

    Based on how it is setup. When deluge finishes it will place it on the completed folder and Radarr has the completed map to it. So, I would think it would then move it to the path: /movies.

     

    Can someone please help me figure out how to get it setup correctly please.

    This is the error I see in Radarr:

    "2024-01-31 21:21:53.7|Error|DownloadedMovieImportService|Import failed, path does not exist or is not accessible by Radarr: /data/completed/Mean.Girls.2004.1080p.Remux.AVC.TrueHD.5.1-playBD. Ensure the path exists and the user running Radarr has the correct permissions to access this file/folder"

     

    Thank you in advance.

    [Support] Linuxserver.io - Nextcloud

    in Docker Containers

    Posted

    11 hours ago, iXNyNe said:

    For anyone having issues running occ, the correct command to use with the LSIO container is:
      

    docker exec -it nextcloud occ

     

     

    Also, I forgot to mention an important detail about the file integrity fix that has been released (entirely my bad!) 

    docker exec nextcloud touch /config/www/nextcloud/config/needs_migration

    Then restart the container.

     

    The reason is the fix is only meant to run when you upgrade from a previous version (which includes the migration process that moved nextcloud's files inside the container). This will make the container think it needs to perform an upgrade and cleanup the integrity check files, and nextcloud will recognize it's already up to date and carry on fine.

    Thank you so much for the help. I can confirm that one I run the Touch command on the console for my nextcloud docker container it works. I also had to click on rescan and it says everything is good.

    [Support] Linuxserver.io - Nextcloud

    in Docker Containers

    Posted

    41 minutes ago, enricovandijkhuizen said:

    I don't understand wtf just happend but after a couple of minutes and a browser refresh everything is back to normal and all styles are being applied again... 

     

    So I don't think I need to post the logs... Now I have just the problem with the Integrity Check...

    That will be resolved after an update to the container. It is currently being tested. 

    [Support] Linuxserver.io - Nextcloud

    in Docker Containers

    Posted

    13 hours ago, iXNyNe said:

    A more permanent fix for the integrity check issue is in the works now. I'll update once it's released. Until then, it shouldn't cause any functional issues to ignore the integrity check error. For anyone who's nextcloud instance isn't working otherwise, again I'll try to reply here quickly, but you may get quicker support in the LSIO discord (where there's other team members available as well).

    Thank you so much for your input on this. 

    [Support] aeleos - cloudflared tunnels

    in Docker Containers

    Posted

    Does anyone know how can I get cloudflare tunnel that is on 10.10.1.43 proxy network be able to communicate with BR0 10.10.1.4 container for remotely? I can get it to work under the proxy network but not under BR0 which gets an IP address from my router. Any help is greatly appreciated. 

    [Support] jasonbean - Apache Guacamole

    in Docker Containers

    Posted

    Hey guys. I went all the way back to January 15 and didn’t come across users setting up their guacamole using cloudflare tunnels. Has anyone gotten this to work or is there a reference to set it up online. Any help is greatly appreciated. 
     

    i have it setup but cannot connect using the url address. The Unraid has its own IP and the Container also has its own ip. I believe that’s the issue but wanted to see if there is a way to set it up with Unraid Ip 10.10.1.43 and guacamole container 10.10.1.3. 

    Soon™️ 6.12 Series

    in Lounge

    Posted

    23 hours ago, NLS said:

     

    First of all, it is Morse code, not Moore's Code, not Moore's Law.
     

    Second, "that other thread" is this thread apparently. So, you are in the wrong place, not them.

    So you can create a new thread for non-morse content and 6.12 (that you populate yourself, since I don't think you can do much without actual content), or wait for an official 6.12 thread.

    That's what I got from reading the whole thing.

    "Making them a thread" ("...to keep playing") was not too polite btw.

     

    Do I like the morse code thing myself? No. Do I care about such a thread existing (or bother me)? No.
    Is "since 6.10" a long time? No, but anyway. When we will be in version 8.22, they will brag about this being "since 6.10" I guess. :D

    How was it not polite. All I was trying to achieve was for the thread not to be filled up with Morse code. Thanks for the correction above. However, I forgot we are on the internet. If someone took it offensive then too bad, not my intentions. 

     

    I am glad it does not bother you. No worries I deleted the thread so no one can be offended for whatever reason they want to get mad at. I really could care less because I know I didn't offend anybody.

    Soon™️ 6.12 Series

    in Lounge

    Posted · Edited by Tucubanito07

    Are we that bored that we need have to Moore's code shenanigans on this thread. How about going to the thread I created for all of you guys that want to talk in Moore's code and leave this thread alone.

     

    Moore's Code

    • Thanks 1
    • Haha 1

    Soon™️ 6.12 Series

    in Lounge

    Posted

    1 hour ago, JorgeB said:

    You can use zfs in the array without that limitation, because every device is a single filesystem, without raidz obliviously, for pools nothing that can be done since it's a zfs limitation, btrfs is more flexible, though not as robust, unfortunately you rarely can have everything.

    If all the devices are their own filesystem, then how does parity work? If I'm not mistaken, I believe there has to be at least 4 drives in a pool in order for it to have redundancy. I could be wrong though. I appreciate your input and knowledge @JorgeB.

    Soon™️ 6.12 Series

    in Lounge

    Posted

    3 hours ago, JorgeB said:

    You can use different size devices to create a zfs raidz, but the extra space will go unused by zfs, and it cannot be used by a different filesystem, though not impossible think of the logistics to make that work with the GUI, to have the same disks in multiple pools.

    Yea this is why I don’t use ZFS and I use Unraid. That limitation is what stopping me from using it. 

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

    Soon™️ 6.12 Series

    in Lounge

    Posted

    1 hour ago, JonathanM said:

    Depends what you are asking. Each individual unRAID array disk can be a different size, and different format if desired. Those would each be single volume ZFS. A pool would need identical size disks in it to fully take advantage of the ZFS specific RAID functions. I'm not familiar enough with ZFS to comment on whether it's a good idea to mix sizes in a ZFS multi disk volume, but I suspect not.

     

    ZFS is file system, much like BTRFS is a file system. How the file system itself deals with multiple member disks is unique to the file system, not Unraid. Currently the unRAID parity array only supports a single disk per slot, with whichever file system you want on it. Pools can have multiple disks, handled by their specific file system.

     

    Clear as mud?

    I know is not an Unraid and is a ZFS thing for multiple drives on a pool. However, I believe they were working on something for that situation. Regardless, if we can create a pool in ZFS for 10tb and the rest of the drive space to be btrs like and be able to use the unused space of a drive. Now, that would be amazing.