Jclendineng

Honestly galaxy brain marketing

Lifetime licenses are not sustainable. But I do agree that update roadmap will need to be less opaque to allow users to see what they are paying for. This is going from an enthusiast platform to a commercial endeavor and that comes with more responsibility. That said, pricing is reasonable and extensions are 39/year which is not very much, you buy hundreds of dollars of hard drives, and server hardware, and don't have 39/year to support the software? Change is hard but imo this is a good step. Also this literally affects none of us, we are all legacy, so Im not sure why anyone's complaining.

Ultimately don't care what LT does but I have to say, subscription makes a lot more sense than current model. From a business standpoint I have always questioned the current model, 1 time purchases are never profitable. The 80 or whatever I paid for my license is not going to sustain the business. They HAVE to come up with a value proposition that includes a paid model, and this may or may not be the ticket, we will see. It's a good start though. I hate subscriptions as much as the next person but everyone has support contracts, think of it as a support contract. All that said, the bar will need raised to make the residual sub worth it for people. TLDR; Residual income is needed to keep LT afloat, this is probably a great plan

Anyone have insight?

Not just you, this was delisted for some time seems to be resolved now though.

I have a motherboard with a NCT6799D-R sensor chip, supposedly in the latest 6* kernel but no luck. Does not load in sensors or sensors-detect, and no temp sensors show up. NCT6687 driver was installed as a plugin but that does not work. NCT6799D-R has a driver but it does not appear unraid uses it, what can I do? Modern AM5 boards use this chip (at least ASUS). edit. Per this, it’s not in fully until Linux kernel 6.5. https://www.phoronix.com/news/Linux-6.5-NCT6799D Any chance we can get this?

Thank you! Yea that makes sense, why spin up a mongo instance just for this. Thank you for the explanation, that’s helpful.

I see 3 unifi controllers in the App Store, the official one that's being discontinued, a new one using a new DB, and this one, what's the difference in this one? What's different here vs official? Thanks!

Unifi introduced port profiles a long time ago and enabled blocking by default on some ports, I had upgraded my switches and didn't check the updated port profiles.

Updated, no issues. I changed back to macvlan from ipvlan when I updated to 6.12.3, and added static Macs to all my docker containers again like pre-6.12 times. So far so good, no crashes or indications that it will crash yet.

First of all, great work! I did as instructed and macvlan works well so far. Question: I have 3 NICs, eth0 and eth1/eth2, I disabled bridging on eth0, eth1/eth2 is using bonded LACP, with a few VLANs that docker is using. Is it recommended that I disable bridging on ALL interfaces and only use bonding? current Docker network below: root@Unraid:~# docker network ls NETWORK ID NAME DRIVER SCOPE 410ede2fc44b br1 macvlan local 8ef814bdd249 br1.10 macvlan local 24c58ff2a324 br1.15 macvlan local 18d59eef887b br1.20 macvlan local a65a073f4cd7 bridge bridge local 8002478340ab eth0 macvlan local f6e5f48f1e23 host host local 5882761c0802 none null local

Going to throw my hat in the ring again, same issues. I switched to ipvlan which isn’t ideal as I need each docker to have a static ip that I hand out from my router. This works for now but eagerly waiting for a fix since this wasn’t an issue in previous releases.

Thank you for the release notes vs RC5. It really helps know what to test. Looking good!

Following as this release broke it for me as well. I switched to ipvlan but it really sucks because I can’t have static ips/macs now. All ips share 1 mac meaning I can no longer manage in my firewall. Quite a pain but I spose better than crashing all the time.

Number 3 is a good point, never had any issues with number 2, numerous restarts, and number 1 isn’t really an issue, it’s in the release notes and it already requires the user to be somewhat familiar with zfs for now. It’s a power user feature and I didn’t have any issues with this particular item. That said, like you said it will be resolved in 6.13…I don’t have any issues not having an array though, setup is super simple (moving from ssd to platter would be nice, that I am looking forward to).