September 8, 20169 yr When I boot up v6.2rc5 in the no plugins installed mode, I see the ntfs-3g package is installed. The version of the ntfs-3g package installed in v6.2rc5 is 2015.3.14. The correct version of ntfs-3g for slackware 14.2 is v2016.2.22. Please update the ntfs-3g package. Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: plugin: installing: /boot/config/plugins/unassigned.devices.plg Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: plugin: running: anonymous Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: plugin: skipping: /boot/config/plugins/unassigned.devices/packages/unassigned.devices-2016.08.19.tgz already exists Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: plugin: skipping: /boot/config/plugins/unassigned.devices/packages/ntfs-3g-2013.1.13-x86_64-1.txz already exists Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: plugin: skipping: /boot/config/plugins/unassigned.devices/packages/ntfs-3g-2016.2.22-x86_64-1.txz already exists Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: plugin: running: anonymous Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: plugin: running: /boot/config/plugins/unassigned.devices/packages/ntfs-3g-2016.2.22-x86_64-1.txz Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: +============================================================================== Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: | Upgrading ntfs-3g-2015.3.14-x86_64-1 package using /boot/config/plugins/unassigned.devices/packages/ntfs-3g-2016.2.22-x86_64-1.txz Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: +============================================================================== Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: Pre-installing package ntfs-3g-2016.2.22-x86_64-1... Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: Removing package /var/log/packages/ntfs-3g-2015.3.14-x86_64-1-upgraded-2016-09-05,09:46:18... Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: --> Deleting /lib64/libntfs-3g.so.86.0.0 Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: Verifying package ntfs-3g-2016.2.22-x86_64-1.txz. Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: Installing package ntfs-3g-2016.2.22-x86_64-1.txz: Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: PACKAGE DESCRIPTION: Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: # ntfs-3g (NTFS read-write filesystem driver) Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: # Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: # The NTFS-3G driver is an open source, freely available NTFS driver Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: # for Linux with read and write support. It provides safe and fast Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: # handling of the Windows XP, Windows Server 2003, Windows 2000 and Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: # Windows Vista file systems. Most POSIX file system operations are Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: # supported, with the exception of full file ownership and access Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: # rights support. Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: # Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: # Homepage: http://www.tuxera.com/community/open-source-ntfs-3g/ Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: # Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: Executing install script for ntfs-3g-2016.2.22-x86_64-1.txz. Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: Package ntfs-3g-2016.2.22-x86_64-1.txz installed. Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: Package ntfs-3g-2015.3.14-x86_64-1 upgraded with new package /boot/config/plugins/unassigned.devices/packages/ntfs-3g-2016.2.22-x86_64-1.txz. This entry doesn't make sense. Sep 5 09:46:18 MediaServer root: Package ntfs-3g-2015.3.14-x86_64-1 upgraded with new package /boot/config/plugins/unassigned.devices/packages/ntfs-3g-2016.2.22-x86_64-1.txz. As far as I can tell, there is no 2015.3.14 version of the ntfs-3g package for slackware. Disregard. I see that LT has compiled a version for unRAID. I need to make a change to UD so it does not install the ntfs-3g driver. This only applies to v6.2. The ntfs-3g package for 6.1.9 (slackware 14.1 version) will still be installed by UD.
September 8, 20169 yr What I'd love to see with regards to ntfs-3g is that unRaid does NOT attempt to mount a cache drive using it (if its been previously formatted as ntfs). (Intermittent problem that I noticed at least through the 6.1 series. Haven't noticed it recently however, so it may be fixed). unRaid doesn't work too well when the cache drive gets mounted ntfs...
September 8, 20169 yr Author I didn't know you could do that. I never tried. The ntfs-3g driver is probably included now so they can offer mounting a disk with ntfs.
September 8, 20169 yr I didn't know you could do that. I never tried. The ntfs-3g driver is probably included now so they can offer mounting a disk with ntfs. Actually it's included by accident We were using it for some experimental VM work and neglected to remove from the build. What do you think, leave it in (and bring up to date), or take it out?
September 8, 20169 yr I didn't know you could do that. I never tried. The ntfs-3g driver is probably included now so they can offer mounting a disk with ntfs. I've seen it in a couple of syslogs over the last year or so. I always blamed it on unassigned devices including the ntfs driver (never knew unRaid included ntfs). The cache drive wound up getting mounted as ntfs read-only with the predictable results from that. But, I have to question why they would include ntfs-3g anyways in the first place since it's not a supported filesystem for unRaid anyways. Here's a log snippet from 6.1.9 where unRaid did it: (http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=50750.msg488087#msg488087) (And unassigned devices is NOT installed on this guy's server Aug 3 20:46:34 Tower emhttp: shcmd (21): mkdir -p /mnt/cache Aug 3 20:46:34 Tower emhttp: shcmd (22): set -o pipefail ; mount -t ntfs -o noatime,nodiratime /dev/sdb1 /mnt/cache |& logger Aug 3 20:46:34 Tower kernel: ntfs: driver 2.1.32 [Flags: R/O MODULE]. Aug 3 20:46:34 Tower kernel: ntfs: volume version 3.1. Aug 3 20:46:34 Tower logger: mount: warning: /mnt/cache seems to be mounted read-only. The ramifications are that since /mnt/cache is mounted read-only, basically the entire share system gets buggered up Aug 3 20:46:34 Tower emhttp: shcmd (32): chmod 0777 '/mnt/user/$RECYCLE.BIN' Aug 3 20:46:34 Tower shfs/user: shfs_chmod: chmod: /mnt/cache/$RECYCLE.BIN 040777 (30) Read-only file system Aug 3 20:46:34 Tower emhttp: shcmd: shcmd (32): exit status: 1 Aug 3 20:46:34 Tower emhttp: shcmd (33): chmod 0777 '/mnt/user/Boot' Aug 3 20:46:34 Tower shfs/user: shfs_chmod: chmod: /mnt/cache/Boot 040777 (30) Read-only file system Aug 3 20:46:34 Tower emhttp: shcmd: shcmd (33): exit status: 1
September 8, 20169 yr I didn't know you could do that. I never tried. The ntfs-3g driver is probably included now so they can offer mounting a disk with ntfs. Actually it's included by accident We were using it for some experimental VM work and neglected to remove from the build. What do you think, leave it in (and bring up to date), or take it out? Take it out due to my post above Stock unRaid should never attempt to mount a previously formatted ntfs cache drive.
September 8, 20169 yr I think unRAID has always included ntfs, just not ntfs-3g, and just the ntfs driver only allows read-only mounting. There are some wiki articles from a long time ago about manually mounting ntfs drives to copy data to your unRAID, or adding the ntfs-3g driver yourself if you needed to write. And I used to do this before we ever had Unassigned Devices or SNAP. The real question is why is it trying to mount ntfs cache drives, whether read-only or not. And if you take it out of core but Unassigned Devices adds it, then what's to keep it from trying to mount ntfs cache drives?
September 8, 20169 yr And if you take it out of core but Unassigned Devices adds it, then what's to keep it from trying to mount ntfs cache drives? Because at that point it becomes a plugin issue because running in safemode would fix the problem. But yeah, unRaid should only ever attempt to mount supported filesystems for any array device (cache/data)
September 8, 20169 yr but... the ntfs-3g package isn't installed in stock unRAID 6.1.9 unfortunately, diagnostics don't show you the directory contents of /boot/extra (maybe it should). But the syslog in that diagnostics doesn't show UD installing (or SNAP either).
September 8, 20169 yr unfortunately, diagnostics don't show you the directory contents of /boot/extra (maybe it should). But the syslog in that diagnostics doesn't show UD installing (or SNAP either). Can't remember when it was added but for sure 6.2 includes a listing of the directory /boot/extra (this information is stored in the file folders.txt under system).
September 8, 20169 yr unfortunately, diagnostics don't show you the directory contents of /boot/extra (maybe it should). But the syslog in that diagnostics doesn't show UD installing (or SNAP either). Can't remember when it was added but for sure 6.2 includes a listing of the directory /boot/extra (this information is stored in the file folders.txt under system). Never knew that... Awesome addition.
September 8, 20169 yr unfortunately, diagnostics don't show you the directory contents of /boot/extra (maybe it should). But the syslog in that diagnostics doesn't show UD installing (or SNAP either). Can't remember when it was added but for sure 6.2 includes a listing of the directory /boot/extra (this information is stored in the file folders.txt under system). Never knew that... Awesome addition. config/boot/extra is not a directory, at least not one created by unRAID OS. config/boot/extra.cfg is a config file that can be used to provide "extra" mount options to shfs, among other things - mainly this is a development tool. This file is not created by default.
September 8, 20169 yr Isn't any package installed in /boot/extra installed automatically at boot up time? https://lime-technology.com/wiki/index.php/Files_on_the_unRAID_flash_drive#User_folders (Or has this operation changed under v6? My understanding is that it hasn't changed) Either way, unRaid should still enforce only supported filesystems being able to be mounted as a data/cache drive, and ntfs is not a supported drive. Remove the ntfs driver and these problems become a plugin issue if it happens again (or user if they threw the package in /boot/extra) Or enforce your supported filesystems and it becomes moot.
September 8, 20169 yr unfortunately, diagnostics don't show you the directory contents of /boot/extra (maybe it should). But the syslog in that diagnostics doesn't show UD installing (or SNAP either). Can't remember when it was added but for sure 6.2 includes a listing of the directory /boot/extra (this information is stored in the file folders.txt under system). Never knew that... Awesome addition. config/boot/extra is not a directory, at least not one created by unRAID OS. config/boot/extra.cfg is a config file that can be used to provide "extra" mount options to shfs, among other things - mainly this is a development tool. This file is not created by default. eh, okay ... but I thought we were talking here about possible packages being installed from /boot/extra
September 8, 20169 yr unfortunately, diagnostics don't show you the directory contents of /boot/extra (maybe it should). But the syslog in that diagnostics doesn't show UD installing (or SNAP either). Can't remember when it was added but for sure 6.2 includes a listing of the directory /boot/extra (this information is stored in the file folders.txt under system). Never knew that... Awesome addition. config/boot/extra is not a directory, at least not one created by unRAID OS. config/boot/extra.cfg is a config file that can be used to provide "extra" mount options to shfs, among other things - mainly this is a development tool. This file is not created by default. eh, okay ... but I thought we were talking here about possible packages being installed from /boot/extra LOL right, my bad. Forgot about that
September 8, 20169 yr Isn't any package installed in /boot/extra installed automatically at boot up time? https://lime-technology.com/wiki/index.php/Files_on_the_unRAID_flash_drive#User_folders (Or has this operation changed under v6? My understanding is that it hasn't changed) It is still the same as before.
September 8, 20169 yr I didn't know you could do that. I never tried. The ntfs-3g driver is probably included now so they can offer mounting a disk with ntfs. Actually it's included by accident We were using it for some experimental VM work and neglected to remove from the build. What do you think, leave it in (and bring up to date), or take it out? Take it out due to my post above Stock unRaid should never attempt to mount a previously formatted ntfs cache drive. Ok this explains a few things. Here's the history. Way back when cache disk feature was first implemented, aside from functioning as a "cache", I had the bright(?) idea that one could use the 'mover' to populate your array with data from foreign file systems. For example, suppose you had an NTFS disk with a bunch of Photos on it. Well you could plug that in, assign to cache, and presuming 'Photos' was a top-level directory, invoke the 'mover' would copy that data from your NTFS disk to the array. Well I never really completely fleshed out that feature and I don't think it was ever publicized as such, but some of that code remains and is interfering with expanded cache disk/pool functionality we have today The way it should be working is that only btrfs/reiserfs/xfs mounts should be attempted on array and cache disks, but the code passes the 'auto' keyword to 'mount' and that is causing these other file systems to get possibly mounted - this is a bug. I have two questions for guys: 1. Should we fix this issue and release an -rc6, or go ahead and change -rc5 to 'stable' and then release a 6.2.1? 2. Should we get rid of the ntfs-3g package or, what the hell, keep it (provided we also only attempt mount of supported file systems - btrfs/reisers/xfs)? Related to question 2, there are other file systems we include in unRAID OS: ext4 (which supports ext2/3/4), HFS (apple), and UDF (cdrom). Again these are included to help out those who want to plug in such formatted devices and then use the command line or midnight commander to move their files. (Actually we were going to include ext4 as one of the choices we offer for formatting array/cache disks but that's been sitting on the 'todo' list for lack of anyone really wanting it.) What say you?
September 8, 20169 yr My vote is for keeping the latest ntfs-3g built in, and keeping it updated, and dropping the old ntfs. If we're going to have an ntfs built in, and I hope so, then it should be the latest, most respected module, with full capabilities. Supporting it doesn't necessarily mean it is supported for array drives, but that would certainly be a welcome addition! It would enable easier drive imports and transfers to unRAID, and easier handling of array drives that are removed and moved to Windows stations. Plus, the repair tools are great, use any updated Windows station. Edit: and my vote is for 6.2.1, and then add the others too.
September 8, 20169 yr I have two questions for guys: 1. Should we fix this issue and release an -rc6, or go ahead and change -rc5 to 'stable' and then release a 6.2.1? I vote for 6.2.1 The issue is rare enough. (But its one of my pet peeves whenever it does come up as WTF) 2. Should we get rid of the ntfs-3g package or, what the hell, keep it (provided we also only attempt mount of supported file systems - btrfs/reisers/xfs)? Related to question 2, there are other file systems we include in unRAID OS: ext4 (which supports ext2/3/4), HFS (apple), and UDF (cdrom). Again these are included to help out those who want to plug in such formatted devices and then use the command line or midnight commander to move their files. (Actually we were going to include ext4 as one of the choices we offer for formatting array/cache disks but that's been sitting on the 'todo' list for lack of anyone really wanting it.) If you don't officially support the filesystem, then don't allow mounts within the array/cache at all. I personally don't care if the packages are included or not. And there are pros for including the packages.
September 8, 20169 yr My vote is also to keep ntfs-3g and update it to the latest version. While do the fix in version 6.2.1.
September 8, 20169 yr My vote is also to keep ntfs-3g and update it to the latest version. While do the fix in version 6.2.1. Looks like this is the consensus
September 8, 20169 yr Author My vote is also to keep ntfs-3g and update it to the latest version. While do the fix in version 6.2.1. I also vote for this approach. The natives are restless and want to see a 6.2 release. I updated UD to not install the ntfs-3g package and will just rely on the LT installed version to do the job.
September 8, 20169 yr Author This will give you the opportunity to remove the ntfs (read only) package.
September 8, 20169 yr I updated UD to not install the ntfs-3g package and will just rely on the LT installed version to do the job. do a conditional install but... the ntfs-3g package isn't installed in stock unRAID 6.1.9
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.