Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About woocash

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Same problem here. Temporary solution that I came up with is to edit the docker settings and change repository to an older version: "linuxserver/duplicati:v2.0.4.23-"
  2. The list is as follows: CA Backup / Restore Appdata Community Applications Dynamix SSD TRIM Dynamix System Information Dynamix System Statistics Dynamix System Temperature File Activity Fix Common Problems Nerd Tools Open Files OpenVPN Client OpenVPN Server TUN mode rclone Unassigned Devices unBALANCE User Scripts Wake On Lan support Strange thing... does the screenshot look similar to what a curl would output?
  3. Hi there! Noticed some "table" appearing at the very end of boot process, after starting samba daemons in console, what is it, and what are the speeds in the table about if anybody knows? Also - can I change something in config files to clear the screen after boot, so only login prompt is visible?
  4. OK, so if that does that, then is it normal that afterwards the files get permissions depending on the username that put them there instead of nobody?
  5. All my shares use only SMB. Just found out, I can use the "Docker Safe New Permissions", running it now, will report the results. Still the question remains, why so vast differences in the state of folder permissions in the first place. EDIT: Permissions in old folders and files seem to be fixed, but any newly created folder gains again different settings, is that how it's supposed to be? Does not make any sense to me drwxrwxrwx 1 he users 0 Jun 18 19:58 New\ folder/ drwxrwsrwx 1 nobody users 226 Feb 11 12:54 Old\ Folder/
  6. I have two users set up in unRaid, let's call them "he" and "she" There is a share called "common" with access set in unRaid as Read/Write to both "he" and "she" users. There is a folder on that share that "he" can open and write to, but "she" cannot. When I check via terminal the underlying permissions they are set to: drwxrwx--- 1 he 2000 0 Jun 18 18:38 Folder/ What is stranger, there are other folders in the same share with totally different permissions: drwxrws--- 1 he 2000 100 Oct 7 2017 Folder2/ drwxr-xr-x 1 he 2000 4096 Apr 17 08:53 Folder3/ drwxrwxrwx 1 he users 8192 Jun 12 13:24 Folder4/ Why are the permissions so vastly different? It appears "she" can access only these folders, which have a group set to "users" instead of 2000. How do I safely repair the permissions? Do i simply use chmod, or is there some setting in the GUI?
  7. If so, than the GUI should not say "enabled", and certainly it should not say next to it: "Status: Running" In reality something is clearly going on even if there is no user. Connecting to FTP server is giving different errors depending on the state of the switch: Enabled (no user assigned): "Connection closed without indication. The connection attempt was rejected." From time to time also "Error 500" Disabled: "Connection refused (Connection refused). The connection attempt was rejected." If the error message is consistently different, than the state of the server must be different - maybe not ftpd itself, but the firewall rules change? EDIT: correct, when FTP server is set to Enabled, even without any users, port 21 is open, whereas with server set to disabled it is closed as it should be.
  8. If I zoom in using mobile safari to open notifications menu (green button on the right side), the submenu opens waaaay to far to the left.
  9. Just do it so You have to click twice in different parts of the screen. So first - "reboot now", and then it expands, requires You to move mouse to the right, and press "confirm". Just in case I doulble-click it by accident.
  10. OK! Great to have it confirmed that no data loss would occur in case the passphrase is provided accidentally.
  11. Correct, so is it sensible to disable array start without an explanation, ask for a non existing password, if no new disk has been added, the existing ones are unencrypted, and there is no use for the password you are asking for? If so, what would happen if i provided the password, before starting the array?
  12. No, I never told unRaid to encrypt that particular disk, as stated in the previous post. I only told the system, that in case I add a new drive, the default filesystem should be xfs-encrypted - at least that is how in the settings this option is explained: "Defines the default file system type to create when an unmountable array device is formatted."
  13. Problem description: Unable to manually start array. Automatic start after reboot works ok. All drives are unencrypted (xfs) Visual manifestation of the problem: After stopping array manually, the START button on Main screen greyed out, input field below it asks for passphrase, even though there are no encrypted drives in the system. Temporary solution: Set "Default file system" in Settings > Disk Settings to "xfs" instead of "xfs-encrypted" Proposed solution: Connect asking for array disk passphrase in the GUI with at least one drive having an encrypted filesystem, not with default settings.
  14. OK, problem Solved, I think it's a bug actually. If in Settings > Disk Settings > Default file system is set to "xfs-encrypted", (which I probably set during my testing, and never actually encrypted any drives), than You will not be able to start array, even if it consists of only non-encrypted drives. The question what happens after applying password on Main screen, to enable array Start button is still to be answered.
  15. Hey, the trial worked great, bought the key (basic - 4 devices), and it prompted me to stop array to finish installing the key. Did that. Now the button to start array is greyed out and cannot be pressed. I rebooted the machine, array autostarted correctly. But if i stop it from GUI, I cannot start it due to greyed-out start button. So in effect every array stop, requires a machine reboot to restart the array. EDIT: Interestingly, when the array is stopped, it apparently cannot be started because it prompts me to "Enter new passphrase", as if the drives were encrypted? All of them re plain xfs and btrfs, so why the prompt? Should i put anything as the passphrase and its confirmation, or would it enable the encryption and god forbid format the drives?