No speed bump for me, but I'm pleased to see that utorrent now no longer keeps the parity drive awake, writing to it whilst seeding.

Last checked on Wed Jul 31 06:02:12 2013 PDT (five days ago), finding 0 errors.

> Duration: 6 hours, 2 minutes, 10 seconds. Average speed: 138.1 MB/sec

 

Same as every other rc I have run +/- a minute.

@ Tom about kernel updates... do we need to worry about the sandy bridge resume bug?

 

Greg has just released Linux Kernel 3.10.5 and he also posted a new blog post about a new kernel being labeled as LTS (Long Term Support) and that is 3.10.x. It's been some time since he is willing to take a stable kernel into LTS and the last time was 3.4.x.

 

I'm still not sure whether Pat is willing to take Linux Kernel 3.10 as the default kernel in Slackware, but if the fix for the Sandy Bridge resume bug has been fixed in 3.10.x along with other fixes, i guess there's a chance that it will be used as the default kernel stock used in Slackware 14.1.

 

update:

Few days ago Greg has released 3.10.5 and declared it as LTS and more importantly, fixed the resume issue on Sandy Bridge machine, so Pat decided to take this kernel as the default kernel stock in Slackware-Current (soon to be 14.1).

 

Greg's post: http://www.kroah.com/log/blog/2013/08/04/longterm-kernel-3-dot-10/

 

and then from: http://kernelnewbies.org/LinuxChanges

seems like some of the changes might be relevant for this project, 5.1?

 

Linux 3.10 has been released on Sun, 30 Jun 2013.

 

Summary: This release adds support for bcache, which allows to use SSD devices to cache data from other block devices; a Btrfs format improvement that makes the tree dedicated to store extent information 30-35% smaller; support for XFS metadata checksums and self-describing metadata, timerless multitasking, SysV IPC, rwlock and mutex scalability improvements, a TCP Tail loss probe algorithm that reduces tail latency of short transactions, KVM virtualization support in the MIPS architecture, support for the ARM big.LITTLE architecture that mixes CPUs of different types, tracing snapshots, new drivers and many small improvements.

@ Tom about kernel updates... do we need to worry about the sandy bridge resume bug?

 

Greg has just released Linux Kernel 3.10.5 and he also posted a new blog post about a new kernel being labeled as LTS (Long Term Support) and that is 3.10.x. It's been some time since he is willing to take a stable kernel into LTS and the last time was 3.4.x.

 

I'm still not sure whether Pat is willing to take Linux Kernel 3.10 as the default kernel in Slackware, but if the fix for the Sandy Bridge resume bug has been fixed in 3.10.x along with other fixes, i guess there's a chance that it will be used as the default kernel stock used in Slackware 14.1.

 

update:

Few days ago Greg has released 3.10.5 and declared it as LTS and more importantly, fixed the resume issue on Sandy Bridge machine, so Pat decided to take this kernel as the default kernel stock in Slackware-Current (soon to be 14.1).

 

Greg's post: http://www.kroah.com/log/blog/2013/08/04/longterm-kernel-3-dot-10/

 

and then from: http://kernelnewbies.org/LinuxChanges

seems like some of the changes might be relevant for this project

I posted such suggestion just last week, and people threw stones at me.  Yet now they seem to be OK with fiddling with the GUI for what could be another year or so.  Seriously, that's beyond me.

I think most in the webgui thread now agree that Tom should wait until 5.1 to implement the new GUI.

And I got the transport endpoint not connected error.

 

Tom, the core file is on my cache drive, just let me know how you want it.

 

Guess I'll be reading up on this error, I went from 12a to 16c a few days ago thinking I was out of the woods!

 

Thanks,

 

pengrus

 

EDIT:  In case it's worth knowing, I have 8G of RAM and an 8G swap on the cache drive.  I was watching a TV show, unraring a movie and fixing a wrongly named tv show via smb when this happened.

endpointsyslog.txt.zip

Anyone notice a possible timezone display bug in 5.0rc16c?

 

I set my timezone, and it's showing as:

 

Current date & time: Sat Aug 10 14:26:31 2013 EIT

 

EIT, I don't recognise that, it's not my local timezone.

 

The actual time is showing correctly, it's just the timezone.

 

This is not a critical bug, looks mostly cosmetic.

 

Via the CLI, it's correct:

 

root@Tower:~# date

Sat Aug 10 15:03:22 CST 2013

 

Anyone notice a possible timezone display bug in 5.0rc16c?

 

I set my timezone, and it's showing as:

 

Current date & time: Sat Aug 10 14:26:31 2013 EIT

 

EIT, I don't recognise that, it's not my local timezone.

 

The actual time is showing correctly, it's just the timezone.

 

This is not a critical bug, looks mostly cosmetic.

 

Via the CLI, it's correct:

 

root@Tower:~# date

Sat Aug 10 15:03:22 CST 2013

 

mine shows the correct thing in the new webgui "Sat Aug 10 02:59:09 2013 CDT". where do you see the wrong time being shown at? (you using SF? unmenu? stock ui? new webgui?)

mine shows the correct thing in the new webgui "Sat Aug 10 02:59:09 2013 CDT". where do you see the wrong time being shown at? (you using SF? unmenu? stock ui? new webgui?)

 

Completely stock blank install of rc16c.

 

Set timezone to my local timezone, NTP server to a local NTP server.

Thanks so much guys... you've taken a lot of the worry out of this upgrade for me.  Just running the parity check now and will hopefully get to the upgrade tomorrow night.

When is 5 going final? Getting bored now.

When is 5 going final? Getting bored now.

+1

 

Everyone keeps saying we are close to R5.0 final,  If thats really true why can't we get a committed date for the core Unraid product. Instead we appear to be stuck in an endless cycle of scope creep. Perhaps we should start naming our software releases after animals like Apple does. I have the perfect animal name for R5.0. Lets call it "Unicorn" it's both magical and mythical at the same time.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Proper and complete documentation (which is very much needed) takes a little while.

 

Be patient, good things are coming!

When? Can we have some commitment to a date? Don't take offense to this, just man up and give us a date, or at least an ETA.

 

When? Can we have some commitment to a date? Don't take offense to this, just man up and give us a date, or at least an ETA.

 

 

Tom committed to the first week of June most recently so a commitment isn't going to mean much.

not only has a committed date been given but servers were sold and advertised as shipping with 5 final on that date.... that has long past......

 

While it was mentioned at one point that documentation was what was holding up the final release, the other various threads about new features that are being added to make unraid more attractive to potential customers would seem be holding things up somewhat further......

 

As a customer that made a purchase some time ago this is what I have come to expect.  The people whose first purchase was one of the servers advertised as shipping with 5 final must consider Lime Technology has having 0 cred by this stage.....

Don't take offense to this, just man up and give us a date, or at least an ETA.

I know you're frustrated - so am I. It'd be nice to have more communication, more firm (and met) timeframes on 5.0 final, but saying "don't be offended" and then insulting someone ("just man up") is an unfortunate choice on your part. We're all adults here; let's keep it professional.

As frustrated as we all are, bear in mind this is for a mass storage device (where to me, reliability of data is much more important than looks or speed to market), and not Duke Nukem.  I appreciate that expediency is an important factor for sales, but colour me selfish when I don't want to lose a lot of data because something isn't absolutely completed before release (I learned the hard way).

Seems like Toms time is limited, thus spending time on new UI and new plugin framwork instead of getting the documentation completed and releasing v5 final seems odd, more like he does not wish to release it...

The natives are getting restless again.  I wish there were some software that would track and graph when this happens. It would be pretty funny to see.

As a customer that made a purchase some time ago this is what I have come to expect.  The people whose first purchase was one of the servers advertised as shipping with 5 final must consider Lime Technology has having 0 cred by this stage.....

 

These "paying customer" comments get brought up every now and then and I find it interesting that people feel the need to flame/whinge/complain like you haven't got an awesome product for the amount of money you spent. Free or $70-$120 for a LIFETIME license is pennies for what unRAID delivers on a daily basis.

 

At the end of the day is renaming rc16c to final really going to change anything? No. The product stays the same. I understand that RC as a label has an impact on impression from a commercial point of view (people who re-sell/manage unRAID servers for customers) and feature creep is definitely frustrating but for the majority of users it isn't going to make any difference to the end result when 5.0 goes "live."

 

Sent from my SGH-I747M using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

 

EVERY program is in a beta regardless of name!!

As a customer that made a purchase some time ago this is what I have come to expect.  The people whose first purchase was one of the servers advertised as shipping with 5 final must consider Lime Technology has having 0 cred by this stage.....

 

These "paying customer" comments get brought up every now and then and I find it interesting that people feel the need to flame/whinge/complain like you haven't got an awesome product for the amount of money you spent. Free or $70-$120 for a LIFETIME license is pennies for what unRAID delivers on a daily basis.

 

At the end of the day is renaming rc16c to final really going to change anything? No. The product stays the same. I understand that RC as a label has an impact on impression from a commercial point of view (people who re-sell/manage unRAID servers for customers) and feature creep is definitely frustrating but for the majority of users it isn't going to make any difference to the end result when 5.0 goes "live."

 

Sent from my SGH-I747M using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

Like I said I have come to accept my situation.  What I can't believe that anybody is OK with is that Servers were pre-sold on the main webpage advertised as shipping with 5 final.  When the advertised date came and went a thread was made were these people requested that the servers be shipped with the RC so that they didn't have to wait.  This is wrong on so many levels, not just morally but I would suspect legally.  I'm not saying that there wasn't a good reason but this needs to be handled better.  The priority needs to be to give these people what they paid for in the shortest time possible (you did state that rc16c final is ready) without trying to please people who haven't purchased yet.  The pretty UI interface can always be added to 5a or 5.01.  At the end of the day even if the people who were directly effected are not overly concerned it still is going to scare of potential customers and make Lime Technologies appear to be untrustworthy....

 

Final this, final that... round and round this forum goes endlessly. How about instead of making the same posts over and over, you just reread the old ones from the past and call it a day instead of spamming the same message every 6 months. Instead of complaining about not having a "final" label (which means nothing if you're forcing him to just drop it on there), how about be more constructive with your time and think of new improvements for the future or hell test for current bugs that haven't been found yet that could botch the entire FINAL product?

6 months ago servers had not been presold advertised as shipping with 5 final at a date that has now past....

 

The situation now is very different and warrants discussion.

 

 

 

Did you buy one? Do you know how many were sold? Where are the waves of these upset buyers? I've seen a few people request their servers ship with the current RC since it's just a label and plenty of people are using it just fine. There's no reason to rush a release, that causes more issues than it's worth.