August 31, 201312 yr mea culpa for even doing the -rc series, I should have just released 5.0 after last -beta, then we'd be at what, 5.0.27 or something, or 5.x.y? That's what i suggested some time ago but the community went after me with torches and pitchforks for such blasfemy
August 31, 201312 yr Do I need to do anything about the new webgui before I install 5.0 final? Or is it safe to keep it? Running 16c atm. Nothing special. Give it a whirl, it's easy to remove, just delete: plugins/webGui-latest.plg plugins/webGui-latest.txz and reboot the server, and back to stock webGui. What's out there now on github is not the latest 'push', that will come very soon. When I upgrade to the new GUI, the Transmission settings section disappears: So, I attempted to revert, but there is no /boot/plugins folder: There is also nothing relevant in the /boot/config/plugins folder. ?
August 31, 201312 yr syslog without any plugin Total size: 2 TB Current position: 2.26 GB (0.1 %) Estimated speed: 26.8 MB/sec Estimated finish: 20 hours, 41 minutes This was the result Last checked on Fri Aug 30 11:58:44 2013 CEST (today), finding 0 errors. > Duration: 14 hours, 21 minutes, 12 seconds. Average speed: 38.7 MB/sec Earlier release was this process around 9 hours with speed around 70MB/sec , All good now, I have moved my BRi10 card to differen slit for some weeks ago, now when moving back to the previous slot all is fine again :-) Estimated speed: 75.9 MB/sec Estimated finish: 7 hours, 19 minutes
August 31, 201312 yr When I upgrade to the new GUI, the Transmission settings section disappears... Reboot seems to fix this. Did for me also.
August 31, 201312 yr I just upgraded my server from 5.0rc16c to 5.0 final and everything was smooth, no issues whatsoever. So I thought I'd add my "me too" post and just say thanks to Tom for all the hard work that went into this release.
August 31, 201312 yr When I upgrade to the new GUI, the Transmission settings section disappears... Reboot seems to fix this. Did for me also. Yes, that fixed it. Cheers.
August 31, 201312 yr upgraded from rc16c to final, all good. I did uncheck the box and kicked off a parity check. I didn't read about the bug about it doing corrections even with the box unchecked. Good thing it had 0 errors. Will the monthly party check also run with corrections because of this issue? speeds seem about the same to me. Duration: 12 hours, 58 minutes, 43 seconds. Average speed: 64.2 MB/sec
August 31, 201312 yr mea culpa for even doing the -rc series, I should have just released 5.0 after last -beta, then we'd be at what, 5.0.27 or something, or 5.x.y? That's what i suggested some time ago but the community went after me with torches and pitchforks for such blasfemy BURN HIM!!! Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4
August 31, 201312 yr upgraded from rc16c no problems so far, parity check is smoking right along ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Total size: 2 TB Current position: 213.33 GB (11%) Estimated speed: 96.67 MB/sec Estimated finish: 308 minutes Sync errors detected: 0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thanks for the hard work Tom! Cheers
August 31, 201312 yr I'm one of those who have been waiting for this release. Now I need to build my machine and jump in the pool with the rest of you! The resources here in the forum are fantastic, and convinced me to go with unRaid rather than FreeNAS, NAS4Free, OpenIndiana (all ZFS). I look forward to building my server, it is going to be a bit different, will post pics when it comes together. Michael Come on in, the water's lovely this time o' year!
August 31, 201312 yr All good here boys and girls. I manually set my CPU governor settings so I haven't come up against that bug.
August 31, 201312 yr Today I successfully upgraded both of my 4.7 servers to 5.0. No issues at all with the upgrade. A couple of oddities that I'm trying to figure out now that I have completed the upgrade: [*] Do I need to run a parity check after upgrading? I just ran a parity check 2 days ago and there were no sync errors found. Curious if I need to run another one immediately after upgrading to 5.0. [*] It seems S3 sleep program /proc/acpi/sleep is no longer present in 5.0. I googled around and found the /proc/acpi/sleep functionality appears to be deprecated but I'm not sure what is replacing it. [*] In Windows Explorer I'm seeing my shares and also shares to each physical disk, i.e., disk1, disk2, disk3, etc. This was not what I was seeing in Explorer on 4.7. Is there a setting somewhere to disable disk shares from displaying in Windows Explorer? If anyone has any info on any of the above items it would be appreciated. Otherwise I'll keep searching.
August 31, 201312 yr In Windows Explorer I'm seeing my shares and also shares to each physical disk, i.e., disk1, disk2, disk3, etc. This was not what I was seeing in Explorer on 4.7. Is there a setting somewhere to disable disk shares from displaying in Windows Explorer? There is an option under the settings for each drive that sets the visibility options for that drive.
August 31, 201312 yr In Windows Explorer I'm seeing my shares and also shares to each physical disk, i.e., disk1, disk2, disk3, etc. This was not what I was seeing in Explorer on 4.7. Is there a setting somewhere to disable disk shares from displaying in Windows Explorer? There is an option under the settings for each drive that sets the visibility options for that drive. I've always wondered that, so thanks. I had seen that before but I thought it might affect the shares on the disk as well and never tried...
August 31, 201312 yr Today I successfully upgraded both of my 4.7 servers to 5.0. No issues at all with the upgrade. In Windows Explorer I'm seeing my shares and also shares to each physical disk, i.e., disk1, disk2, disk3, etc. This was not what I was seeing in Explorer on 4.7. Is there a setting somewhere to disable disk shares from displaying in Windows Explorer? If anyone has any info on any of the above items it would be appreciated. Otherwise I'll keep searching. Yes. There is a setting for each and every disk. On the main screen click on the "Disk #" then look at the "SMB Security Settings" section for the "Export" field. Select the option you want, such as 'Yes (Hidden)" which will allow it to be used but not displayed via SMB or "No" which will not allow it to be used or displayed via SMB. This controls the "disk#" share. Repeat this for each and every disk.
August 31, 201312 yr Working great so far. Today I was running RC8a, upgraded to 16c, then to 5.0 final and everything went smooth. Just wish I could get couch potato working but thats for a different thread. Great job Tom
August 31, 201312 yr Upgraded and ran parity check all great. I'm not running the new GUI still an old ver of SF. Now I can complete my esx migration. Big thanks tom
September 1, 201312 yr Working great so far. Today I was running RC8a, upgraded to 16c, then to 5.0 final and everything went smooth. Just wish I could get couch potato working but thats for a different thread. Great job Tom [hijack] use influencer's, works great [/hijack]
September 1, 201312 yr Is there an issue running the new GUI on a single core CPU? I have a 2.4Ghz AMD LE-1620 that I upgraded to unRAID pro 5.0 but when I tried the new GUI it became unresponsive. I was never able to access it after the upgrade to the new GUI. I had no issues with my unRAID2 and unRAID3 which both have dual core CPUs. So with a single core at 2.4Ghz is thsi a problem or maybe just an isolated incident. I went back rc16c and had to do parity check. But now it's back where it should be and I have upgraded again to 5.0 butI'm not sure if I should try to use the new GUI again.
September 1, 201312 yr Just upgraded from 4.7 to 5.0, all went smoothly here! Only questions now are surrounding the new plugins and if I need to reinstall any of the old "4.7 add-ons"... from what I can tell I don't think I need anything additional. I only ever had unmenu and a few of its "packages". Ready to toss my 3tb disks in there and get going! Thanks Tom(s)!
September 1, 201312 yr Is there an issue running the new GUI on a single core CPU? I have a 2.4Ghz AMD LE-1620 that I upgraded to unRAID pro 5.0 but when I tried the new GUI it became unresponsive. I was never able to access it after the upgrade to the new GUI. I had no issues with my unRAID2 and unRAID3 which both have dual core CPUs. So with a single core at 2.4Ghz is thsi a problem or maybe just an isolated incident. I went back rc16c and had to do parity check. But now it's back where it should be and I have upgraded again to 5.0 butI'm not sure if I should try to use the new GUI again. I went ahead and tried it again. It seems like the first few minutes after the GUI upgrade that it is unresponsive. I waited several minutes and then tried to access it. This time the pages came up properly with the new GUI.
September 1, 201312 yr Is there an issue running the new GUI on a single core CPU? I have a 2.4Ghz AMD LE-1620 that I upgraded to unRAID pro 5.0 but when I tried the new GUI it became unresponsive. I was never able to access it after the upgrade to the new GUI. I had no issues with my unRAID2 and unRAID3 which both have dual core CPUs. So with a single core at 2.4Ghz is thsi a problem or maybe just an isolated incident. I went back rc16c and had to do parity check. But now it's back where it should be and I have upgraded again to 5.0 butI'm not sure if I should try to use the new GUI again. I went ahead and tried it again. It seems like the first few minutes after the GUI upgrade that it is unresponsive. I waited several minutes and then tried to access it. This time the pages came up properly with the new GUI. Hi, you using the swap page plugin from THEONE ? in both my servers i have to wait till the swap page is p before i can access the gui... guess it needs to compete the complete plugin circle before the GUI is ready ... you can test it by disabling mounting the swap during boot the gui should be much quicker accessible
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.