October 12, 20169 yr So, I've somehow managed to come up with two shares with the same case insensitive names - isos and ISOS. ISOS, I've created as a normal share the way I've done all the rest. isos, I'm not sure where it's coming from. I believe it's got something to do with VM manager. However, if I disable VMs in Settings, go under the share via CLI and manually clear it out and delete it, it comes back. So...I'm looking for help figuring out what I've done and how to undo it.
October 12, 20169 yr So, I've somehow managed to come up with two shares with the same case insensitive names - isos and ISOS. ISOS, I've created as a normal share the way I've done all the rest. isos, I'm not sure where it's coming from. I believe it's got something to do with VM manager. However, if I disable VMs in Settings, go under the share via CLI and manually clear it out and delete it, it comes back. So...I'm looking for help figuring out what I've done and how to undo it. It's not you, it's unraid. The vm manager is creating the iso share because that is what is specified in the advanced settings for the default iso storage path. IMHO, this is a bug, and should be handled differently by unraid. System created shares should be checked for this kind of conflict. To resolve it in your case, go to settings, vm manager, turn on advanced view, and change the default iso storage path to match what you want to use.
October 12, 20169 yr Author Well, that's an unfortunate coincidence. Thanks for the info. And have I mentioned how much I hate stuff that has a "basic" and "advanced" toggle? If not for that I would have spotted it myself.
October 12, 20169 yr whats more annoying is that it still creates those shares even if you can't run VM's and then can't get to those settings..
October 12, 20169 yr whats more annoying is that it still creates those shares even if you can't run VM's and then can't get to those settings.. My secondary server has never had those shares created (and I've never enabled VMs on it). Pretty much any CPU has the ability to run VMs (all they need is HVM support not IOMMU which is required for passthrough)
October 12, 20169 yr whats more annoying is that it still creates those shares even if you can't run VM's and then can't get to those settings.. My secondary server has never had those shares created (and I've never enabled VMs on it). Pretty much any CPU has the ability to run VMs (all they need is HVM support not IOMMU which is required for passthrough) I think the OP's problem is a good candidate for FCP, check for case collision on share names, also cross check with default system share settings.
October 12, 20169 yr whats more annoying is that it still creates those shares even if you can't run VM's and then can't get to those settings.. My secondary server has never had those shares created (and I've never enabled VMs on it). Pretty much any CPU has the ability to run VMs (all they need is HVM support not IOMMU which is required for passthrough) I think the OP's problem is a good candidate for FCP, check for case collision on share names, also cross check with default system share settings. Has done that for a long time on share names. And on extended tests also does it for individual files
October 12, 20169 yr whats more annoying is that it still creates those shares even if you can't run VM's and then can't get to those settings.. My secondary server has never had those shares created (and I've never enabled VMs on it). Pretty much any CPU has the ability to run VMs (all they need is HVM support not IOMMU which is required for passthrough) I think the OP's problem is a good candidate for FCP, check for case collision on share names, also cross check with default system share settings. Has done that for a long time on share names. And on extended tests also does it for individual files I didn't notice you cross checking with the system share settings.
October 12, 20169 yr whats more annoying is that it still creates those shares even if you can't run VM's and then can't get to those settings.. My secondary server has never had those shares created (and I've never enabled VMs on it). Pretty much any CPU has the ability to run VMs (all they need is HVM support not IOMMU which is required for passthrough) This is what I get when I try to access VM Manager: Your hardware does not have Intel VT-x or AMD-V capability. This is required to create VMs in KVM. Click here to see the unRAID Wiki for more information
October 12, 20169 yr whats more annoying is that it still creates those shares even if you can't run VM's and then can't get to those settings.. My secondary server has never had those shares created (and I've never enabled VMs on it). Pretty much any CPU has the ability to run VMs (all they need is HVM support not IOMMU which is required for passthrough) This is what I get when I try to access VM Manager: Your hardware does not have Intel VT-x or AMD-V capability. This is required to create VMs in KVM. Click here to see the unRAID Wiki for more information Please post contents of your 'config/domains.cfg' file on the flash.
October 12, 20169 yr whats more annoying is that it still creates those shares even if you can't run VM's and then can't get to those settings.. My secondary server has never had those shares created (and I've never enabled VMs on it). Pretty much any CPU has the ability to run VMs (all they need is HVM support not IOMMU which is required for passthrough) This is what I get when I try to access VM Manager: Your hardware does not have Intel VT-x or AMD-V capability. This is required to create VMs in KVM. Click here to see the unRAID Wiki for more information Please post contents of your 'config/domains.cfg' file on the flash. As requested: SERVICE="enable" IMAGE_FILE="/mnt/user/system/libvirt/libvirt.img" IMAGE_SIZE="1" DEBUG="no" DOMAINDIR="/mnt/user/domains/" MEDIADIR="/mnt/user/isos/" VIRTIOISO="" BRNAME="br0" VMSTORAGEMODE="auto"
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.