Hi everyone,

 

I am currently at unRAID Pro v 3.0. I downloaded the 4.3.3 version and I copied the information as they say in the readme file. I did NOT copy the config information as i wanted to make sure that my network and server name stayed the same. I looked into the 4.3.3 "original" config files and they were all blank. So keeping mine should have been fine.

 

When unRAID boots, it gives me error messages on USB stating something to the effect that it can't assign IRQ to them (which I am not using anyway except to boot), it also is saying something about ATA1 errors as well and at the end, it can't find /boot/config files.

 

It boots and it is called Tower (not like my own config files are) and is trying to use DHCP (which again is not my setting as I use static addresses).

 

Why would it not take my config files (in the Config folder on the root of the USB key) and what about the error messages?

 

What is the procedure to upgrade from 3.0 to 4.3.3 if it's not to just copy the new files over?

 

Thanks!

Did you reformat the flash drive? and then copy the files?

 

or

 

Did you just copy the bzimage, bzroot, syslinux.cfg, memtest, menu.c32 files to your flash drive?

 

Did you remember to set the volume label on the flash drive to UNRAID ??  (This is a critical step... without this label, the flash drive will not be mounted on /boot and the symptoms you are describing are likely.

 

To proove if it was mounted, log in as "root" and type:

mount

 

You should see output like this:

proc on /proc type proc (rw)

sysfs on /sys type sysfs (rw)

usbfs on /proc/bus/usb type usbfs (rw)

/dev/sda1 on /boot type vfat (rw)

 

Odds are you do not see a line like the one I highlighted in blue.

 

Then type:

ls -l /dev/disk/by-label

 

Output will look like this if the volume label was set:

total 0

lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 10 Jul 15 14:16 UNRAID -> ../../sda1

 

If you did not set the volume label, the flash drive with its configuration would not be mounted at /mount, and the network config not read properly.

 

Instructions are here : http://lime-technology.com/wiki/index.php?title=USB_Flash_Drive_Preparation

 

Joe L.

Ok, I did a bunch of additional testing and I am still stuck.

 

3.0 works beautifully - so no problems here and I can go back to it whenever I want. At least I can be up and running if need be.

 

I did reformat the drive according to the instructions you pointed to me. So far so good. The label IS UNRAID as it is supposed to be, but you are right in the sense that the Linux OS does not recognize it as such.

 

I do not have the blue line you mentionned and I do not have the UNRAID listed in the /dev/disk/by-label.

 

So there is something in there that is wrong.

 

I get multiple error messages during boot-up.

 

The first one is related to USB and says:

Mounting USB mass storage - UNLINK after no IRQ?

and then fails on all 4 USB ports. (the system still boots from USB though...)

 

Later on, I get ATA errors:

ATA1.00 QC timeout

ATA1.00 failed to read native max address

HPA support seems broken - will skip HPA handling

Failed to recover some devices - will retry in 5 seconds

 

It takes then a while to get to the end as it gets stuck on each ATA (I have 6 currently)

 

Then it can't read the by-label and it gives me the following error

Special device /dev/disk/by-label/UNRAID does not exists

 

Obviously it can't seem to read the USB key

 

look at this screenshot of the actual USB key - it does state UNRAID as its name and FAT32 as it formatting.

 

I am using an ASUS P5PE-VM motherboard which works very well with UNRAID 3.0...

 

Thanks!

 

Any other ideas?

Links to your hard drive won't work.

 

Try uploading the image.

 

 

Bill

It looks like the upload folder is full.

 

The image is 25K and I can't upload it right now.

Here is an interesting tidbit of information.

 

I just performed a succesfull upgrade to unRAID 4.2.4 - no problems.

 

What is that different with 4.3.3 from 4.2.4?

 

4.3.3 is still a no go...

 

Thanks!

It is possible that you have hardware similar enough to several other users, who were unable to upgrade to v4.3, but had no problems with v4.2.4.  See this thread:  http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=2159.  (Or proceed directly to the post in it where I pretty well concluded that v4.2.4 was the only thing that would work for them, for now.)

 

If you wish to provide syslogs, of attempts with both versions, we may be able to tell if they are the same problem, or something different.  To capture syslogs, see my sig.