Frank1940

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    9860

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    17

 Content Type 

Report Comments posted by Frank1940

    [6.12.9] CIFS: VFS: directory entry name would overflow frame end of buf

    in Stable Releases

    Posted

    On 3/28/2024 at 10:34 AM, dlandon said:

    Looks to be someone's attempt to prevent a buffer overflow intentionally or unintentionally.  I suspect one of the parameters being passed in to the function causes the failure - like the buff_start or end_of_buffer pointers are incorrect.

     

    Good find.  Thank you.

    @dlandon, Any thoughts on when this issue is going to be resolved?  I know that I will not be upgrading from 6.12.8 until it is.

    • Like 2

    [6.12.3] Dell R210 ii getting stuck in bootloader

    in Stable Releases

    Posted

    One (or more) of the new files for version 6.12.3 is missing.  

     

    Here is what I would do:

     

    1--- Shut the server down with the power button. Pull the flash/boot drive from server and pug into your PC.

     

    2--- Make a complete backup of everything on that drive.

     

    3--- Run chkdsk on the boot drive and fix any problems found.

     

    4--- Download version 6.12.3 from this site:

          https://unraid.net/download

     

    5--- Unzip the file.

     

    6---  Copy all of the    bz*     files from the root of the of the zip to the root of the flash drive.  Overwrite as required. 

     

    7--- Eject the drive. (Important!)  Now pull the drive from your PC and plug back into your server. 

     

    8--- Start the server. 

     

    It should now boot.  If not post back...

     

     

    Unraid OS version 6.12.0-rc5 available

    in Prereleases

    Posted · Edited by Frank1940

    11 hours ago, Squid said:

    Nobody thinks of it like that, and it's never actually logged anything in my system setting the syslog server to the IP or 127.0.0.1. For remote systems it works no problems

     

    10 hours ago, dlandon said:

    Works for me.

     

    Since I wrote the instructions on 'how to use' the Syslog Server, I just retested the process of setting up the Unraid server with the problem server as the Local syslog server.  It still works.  (The only problem with writing the file to the Unraid server with the problem is the 'write cache' that all modern OS use.  It is possible for the 'crash' to occur before the OS could finish writing the data to a physical device... )

    • Upvote 1

    Unraid OS version 6.12.0-rc3 available

    in Prereleases

    Posted · Edited by Frank1940

    20 minutes ago, Koenig said:

     

    I have all clients on my network set to use DHCP, and then I manage all IP and network from my pfSense router.

    They have had the same IP since the day they first connected to my network.

    Again I do not know if this is the best way to go about it but I started doing it this way long before I got my first Unraid-server and it has been working well, but as I mentioned earlier if this is a bad way to do it I'm open to suggestions.

    One of the problems with SMB is that it can take a long time for the configuration to stabilize.  see this section of an MS document for details:

     

    https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/previous-versions/windows/it-pro/windows-server-2003/cc737661(v=ws.10)?redirectedfrom=MSDN#registration-and-propagation

     

    Make sure that you have one of your Unraid servers on 24-7 and force that server to be the Local Master.  See this code (to be added to SMB Extras section of SMB settings) to do that:

      

    [global]
preferred master = yes
os level = 255

     

    It does not always solve the problem when a new computer is started up but it seems to help...

     

    LEt me add one more thing.  With peer-to-peer networking, which Unraid uses in it basic configuration, any computer may be either a client, a server or a client and server simultaneously.  It all depends on how you setup each computer!

    Unraid OS version 6.12.0-rc2 available

    in Prereleases

    Posted

    15 minutes ago, Squid said:

    Actually, the GitHub repo linked (https://github.com/memtest86plus/memtest86plus) is GPL2.0 and could be included ( @limetech)

     

    Would solve at least one major issue with the current version where it won't work with UEFI booting...

    I can see  where this would mean that anyone who wanted to use the new version of memtst86plus would have to rebuild the boot/flash drive.   Someone might be able to write a script to do this...

    Unraid OS version 6.12.0-rc2 available

    in Prereleases

    Posted · Edited by Frank1940

    10 minutes ago, infidel said:

    I've come back to this problem after the weekend and it seems to come down to this:

    According to all the advice I can find (remember, I'm new to Unraid), I've been trying to copy files to /mnt/user/[sharename]

    For some reason, these map to /mnt/disk1/[sharename], disk1 being the 32Gb USB stick I'm using for a data drive.

    If you map a network drive to \\unraidserver\sharename\ it maps to /mnt/user/[sharename], so any files you copy fill up the USB drive rather being copied to the pool.

    When the USB drive is full, all hell breaks loose (see above)

    I don't know how to change this, if it's something I've done, or a bug that needs reporting.

    Please post up your diagnostics file.   It will help the Gurus to see what is going on.

     

    EDIT:  Tell us the name of the share involved.

    • Like 1

    Unraid OS version 6.12.0-rc1 available

    in Prereleases

    Posted

    35 minutes ago, enJOyIT said:

     

    Thanks for replying!

     

    To migrate every of my single disks to zfs I have to copy via cli from diskXX (xfs) to diskXX (zfs), right? Would the parity recognize these copy actions?

     

    Yes, if you do it properly.  The proper procedure has been documented and can be found here:

     

    https://wiki.unraid.net/index.php/File_System_Conversion#Mirror_each_disk_with_rsync.2C_preserving_parity

     

    You want to use the "Mirror each disk with rsync, preserving parity" method.   I did both of my servers a few years back.  Read the entire procedure first so you know exactly what you will be doing.  (I made a table that had step-by-step instructions with the actual disk identification numbers for each step.  I checked off each step as it was completed. {Some steps take many hours to complete...}  Be prepared as it will take two-to-three hours per TB of data!)

    Unraid OS version 6.12.0-rc1 available

    in Prereleases

    Posted

    Come on, Folks.  When you experience a problem that as has been previously reported in this thread,  Do NOT post another message in this thread about it. 

     

    First look in this Prerelease Bug Report sub-forum for a bug report about what you found.  If you have more information that could help with the solution, post in that thread and provide complete logs and diagnostics files. 

     

    If you don't find a thread about the problem, create a bug report by creating a thread about it!  If you want to include a snippet of a log file in your narrative, be sure that you attach the complete log file. (If you don't know how to create a new thread, it is very simple.  Just click on the 'Start new topic' button at the top or bottom of this page.)

    • Haha 1
    • Upvote 1

    [6.10.3] Intermittent SMB Issues After 6.10.2 Upgrade

    in Stable Releases

    Posted

    22 minutes ago, CallOneTech said:

    Forward progress is progress... We just need to cross the finish line now.

     

    Don't expect this anytime soon for Samba-Active_Directory issues or anything else.  Just remember that MS releases monthly updates to supported versions of Windows to address various issues.  About half the time, one or more of these updates are updated within two weeks of release because of edge-case problems in the updates.

     

    Remember that MS is still updating SMB and often Samba will require an update to keep current with those changes...

    [6.10.3] Intermittent SMB Issues After 6.10.2 Upgrade

    in Stable Releases

    Posted

    46 minutes ago, Geoff Bland said:

     

    Thanks.

     

    But... not sure if you are the right person to ask but having NFS, SMB and Active Directory under a subtopic called "Network Protocol Support" seems odd. These are file sharing protocols, users might not expect to find these here. Would "File Sharing Protocol Support" be a better name for this sub-forum. Sorry for looking a gift-horse in the mouth 😐

     

    Here is the spot where this whole forum section came about:

             

    It would not be out-of-place for you to make a suggestion about the title.  When I was thinking about it, it was a bit of a struggle to come with a suitable name.  Your idea has definite merit!  Pinging @SpencerJ so he knows the background if you make a suggestion in the above thread/topic. 

    • Like 1

    [6.10.3] Intermittent SMB Issues After 6.10.2 Upgrade

    in Stable Releases

    Posted · Edited by Frank1940

    There is now a sub-forum for Active Directory issues in the Unraid OS 6 Support Section of the forum.  This will allow you an opportunity to ask for assistance and advice about specific issues about Active Directory problems.  By taking your issue there, it will permit many different threads/topics each one addressing a single problem from a single user.  (Please don't hijack a thread/topic!   If the problem looks exactly like the one you are experiencing, follow the thread quietly and see if it can provide an answer/solution to your problem.  If you need a quicker answer, start a new thread/topic and ask for help.)

     

    Here is the link to the sub-forum for Active Directory:

     

            https://forums.unraid.net/forum/102-active-directory/

     

    I am hoping that some of you will take the time to post some guidance/tutorials to those users who are just beginning to use Active Directory.   Remember that all of us were a Noob at some time in the past...

    [6.11] No more "private" SMB access possible from different devices (Windows, Android, Printer)

    in Stable Releases

    Posted · Edited by Frank1940

    If you read what it says, there is a difference in behavior between

     

    'min protocol = SMBv2_02'

                and

    'min protocol = SMB2'

     

    (The parameter 'SMB2' -- or there is no 'min protocol' parameter specified--- actually means that only SMBv2.10 and above is supported! IF you want to use an older protocol than SMBv2.10, you must actually specify that one.)

     

    EDIT:  No guarantee that 2.02 will work but it is probably the last possibility...

     

    EDIT2:  I just looked up the EPSON WorkForce Pro WF-4745 and it a relatively new printer (~2018).  I thought it might be one from prior to 2010.  Not sure what the problem is.  And what does Unraid have to do with this printer?  Unraid does not have provision for mounting any printers...

    [6.11] No more "private" SMB access possible from different devices (Windows, Android, Printer)

    in Stable Releases

    Posted · Edited by Frank1940

    Start by going through this thread very carefully:

         https://forums.unraid.net/topic/128875-smb-private-readwrite-working-just-cant-paste-folders-only-files       

     

     

    Make sure that you have read the first post (and the PDF file) in this thread about windows issues:

           

            https://forums.unraid.net/topic/110580-security-is-not-a-dirty-word-unraid-windows-10-smb-setup/

     

    MacOS Optimization

    in Prereleases

    Posted

    12 minutes ago, wow001 said:

    So far,

    I have removed all the extras setting. Settings as displayed in the attached image.

    A Note to all you are following this:

     

    You don't have to edit/delete any settings that you have added into your smb-extra configuration.  You can just put a    #    in front of any parameter and that will cause the parameter to become a "comment"--- basically a text statement that is often used to explain the purpose of a parameter. 

     

    You can also use the comment trick to evaluate which ones of a number of parameters actually improve things in your situation.  (Sometimes, smb parameter settings fix things that are edge case conditions but they can also introduce other side effects.)

    • Like 1

    MacOS Optimization

    in Prereleases

    Posted

    18 minutes ago, wow001 said:

    When you add extra setting to the - SETTINGS/SMB/SMB Extras

     

    Are these being saved to the /etc/samba/smb.conf or /boot/config/smb-extra.conf ?

     

    In the smb-extra.conf file.

     

    If you look at the /etc/samba/smb.conf  file, you will find that the smb-extra.conf file is 'included' as a command in the that file.    (As I recall, all of the commands/parameters in the smb.conf are 'executed' in order that they occur in the processing of smb.conf.   Thus, if a parameter occurs twice, the second one is the one enforced.)  To see the complete contents of smb.conf, use the following command in the GUI terminal : 

    cat /etc/samba/smb.conf

     

    [6.10.3] Intermittent SMB Issues After 6.10.2 Upgrade

    in Stable Releases

    Posted · Edited by Frank1940

    Disclaimer:  I am not an expert on Windows Server as I have never had the need to use it.

     

    Having said that I have some experience with SMB.  I began back when Windows for Workgroups was released.  I know just enough to make me dangerous at times.  But I have learned on thing, SMB (and Samba) are a kludge!  And Microsoft (who basically control SMB) has often made changes that break things in Samba.  (or, at least, the way that some of us are using it!)

     

    You also have to understand that LimeTech just adds the standard Samba package to Unraid and generates a smb.conf file that set  it up for most users.   It seems to work for most of us without major problems.  (Well, Windows users are advised to setup a login to the Unraid server to prevent MS from breaking things by insisting on that a secured connection between the Windows client and any server...)

     

    What I propose is that (at least) one of you folks with the problem take a look at the Samba Mailing Lists and see if this problem has been discussed there.  The Link is below:

     

           https://www.samba.org/samba/archives.html