Version 6.3.0-rc6 Release Notes

January 4, 20179 yr

I upgraded from 6.2.4 and now some of my shares claim password incorrect on certain samba devices. I never changed a thing on either device, and it was working minutes before the update. I tried cold booting every device having the problem and no luck. Only workaround I found is to enable public shares... Secured doesn't work anymore.

Any ideas?

January 4, 20179 yr

I upgraded from 6.2.4 and now some of my shares claim password incorrect on certain samba devices. I never changed a thing on either device, and it was working minutes before the update. I tried cold booting every device having the problem and no luck. Only workaround I found is to enable public shares... Secured doesn't work anymore.

Any ideas?

Start with the suggestions here:

http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=54910.0

January 5, 20179 yr

I'm seeing the following in my syslog on array start:

Jan 3 19:22:32 Lapulapu emhttp: shcmd (211): set -o pipefail ; /usr/local/sbin/mount_image '/mnt/user/system/libvirt/libvirt.img' /etc/libvirt 1 |& logger

Jan 3 19:22:32 Lapulapu root: /usr/local/sbin/in_use: line 16: warning: command substitution: ignored null byte in input

Jan 3 19:22:32 Lapulapu root: /usr/local/sbin/mount_image: line 60: warning: command substitution: ignored null byte in input

Line 16 of in_use:

DISK=`getfattr -n system.LOCATION --absolute-names --only-values "$FILE" 2>/dev/null`

Line 60 of mount_image:

DISK=`getfattr -n system.LOCATION --only-values --absolute-names "$IMAGE_FILE" 2>/dev/null`

Is there a syntax error in the vicinity of

"$FILE"

and

"$IMAGE_FILE"

, respectively? Perhaps it ought to be

"${FILE}"

and

"${IMAGE_FILE}"

?

January 5, 20179 yr

LOL!!! This is too funny. We were just talking about this earlier today. I'll let Tom explain it later but he has a fix for it and his reason for fixing it was because, "given enough time, someone in the community will be guaranteed to post about it."

In short, you can ignore the issue for now as its not actually an error, just a warning, but Tom has a fix already which will be in the next release.

January 5, 20179 yr

That is a coincidence. I realise it's only a warning but I had no actual errors to investigate!

January 8, 20179 yr

See the following post for a bit more detail:

http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=55420.msg528363#msg528363

In short: When doing a dual drive failure rebuild (in my case a parity redo combined with a data drive rebuild) the time given for completion appears to be based on the time it takes the parity redo to be completed (understandable for the complete action since this will always take the largest amount of time as long as parity is the biggest drive).

However the data drive remains to be "correcting" after it has been completed (in my example the parity sync is beyond the 6TB point and the data drive is a 6TB drive), an error in the parity redo might actually cause the data drive rebuild to be redone.

The above is based on the assumption that data drive reconstruct and parity redo are done at the same speed, if this is not the case it could still be that my reconstruction of the data drive completes before the parity redo is done.

In any case it would be nice if both reconstructions are timed seperately insteed of only the longest one shown.

January 9, 20179 yr

"FTB Server" is getting re-enabled everytime I restart the server. Doesn't stick.

January 9, 20179 yr

"FTB Server" is getting re-enabled everytime I restart the server. Doesn't stick.

Known issue / "feature" that's been around forever. If you don't have any users defined for FTP access then it's actually not running. If you do have users defined, then it does indeed restart regardless of the setting with every boot.

There's a couple of reports in Defect Reports about this along with an explanation of why (although I don't agree with it )