Will upgrade from OMV 4 to OMV 5 require reinstallation?

  • Hello,


    I am a newbie in OMV. I installed OMV 5. However I have seen most packages, I would like to use becoming docker and I do not want to get into docker thing yet. I am planning to downgrade before committing more to OMV 5. I would like to know, if I would like to upgrade, will I be needing reinstallation or simple apt-get dist-upgrade command would be enough.


    Thanks..

  • Hello,


    I am a newbie in OMV. I installed OMV 5. However I have seen most packages, I would like to use becoming docker and I do not want to get into docker thing yet. I am planning to downgrade before committing more to OMV 5. I would like to know, if I would like to upgrade, will I be needing reinstallation or simple apt-get dist-upgrade command would be enough.


    Thanks..

    Unless votdev deviates from what he's done since the project began... When OMV5 is released, running omv-release-upgrade will update your system to the newest release (as well as the underlying Debian release).


    One thing to keep in mind.. any plugins you have that aren't compatible with OMV 5, will be removed/purged.


    You're far better off embracing docker at this point, since that is going to be where almost everything is going. Once you get the hang of it, it is incredibly simple.

  • i am quite surprised that despite OMV 5.x being in quite progressed beta stage, there is still no solution to upgrade from 4.x, which is something i am sure will require extensive testing and several further beta releases.

    HP Proliant Microserver Gen8, E3-1265Lv2, 16 GB ECC RAM, 3x WD RED 3TB + 1x WD RED 4TB + Crucial MX300 525 GB SSD.

    Powered by Proxmox VE

  • i am quite surprised that despite OMV 5.x being in quite progressed beta stage, there is still no solution to upgrade from 4.x, which is something i am sure will require extensive testing and several further beta releases.

    It'ss because it's not stable yet. At least now if people download and install it, they've intentionally done so.


    Could you imagine people upgrading to betas, who had no business doing so, and the problems that would cause with support?


    Again, unless votdev has alternate plans that I've not read yet... There will be an upgrade path when it's stable.

  • You're far better off embracing docker at this point, since that is going to be where almost everything is going. Once you get the hang of it, it is incredibly simple.

    Honestly, even if docker will be used, it should fit into the system conventions. For example, I am advised to use a container in place of webdav plugin in a new thread, because webdav will not be supported in OMV5. I installed it, now I have fiddle with new users, permissions etc. in docker environment. I have make docker volumes attach to the shares and many other tids and bits.


    This corrupts whole nas idea. About, more than ten years ago, I was managing my personal linux servers with samba, nfs, ftp etc. I was tired of these, managing users, shares, permissions in different environments and applications and bought a nas. NAS is supposed to facilitate and enhance. Spinning docker containers from all sources is not solution to the problem.


    If I am to manage docker containers for even basic NAS services, I can just get rid of OMV, make every service docker container and just run my bare linux server with docker containers. Why will I be needing OMV or anyother NAS solution.


    Anyhow thank for the reply...

  • Unless votdev deviates from what he's done since the project began... When OMV5 is released, running omv-release-upgrade will update your system to the newest release (as well as the underlying Debian release).

    I really do hope you are right about this.

    --
    Google is your friend and Bob's your uncle!


    OMV AMD64 5.x on ASRock Rack C2550D4I C0 Stepping - 16GB ECC - Silverstone DS380 + Silverstone DS380 DAS Box.

  • I did everything as you say, using Ubuntu server with Docker, but the simplicity of configuration you have with OMV is priceless. What I did in a week of work with Ubuntu server I did in a day with OMV


    This is the reason I am here, but docker path taken by OMV even for basic services will be beneficial to developers but not to the end users, to the "both of us".

  • Honestly, even if docker will be used, it should fit into the system conventions. For example, I am advised to use a container in place of webdav plugin in a new thread, because webdav will not be supported in OMV5. I installed it, now I have fiddle with new users, permissions etc. in docker environment. I have make docker volumes attach to the shares and many other tids and bits.
    This corrupts whole nas idea. About, more than ten years ago, I was managing my personal linux servers with samba, nfs, ftp etc. I was tired of these, managing users, shares, permissions in different environments and applications and bought a nas. NAS is supposed to facilitate and enhance. Spinning docker containers from all sources is not solution to the problem.


    If I am to manage docker containers for even basic NAS services, I can just get rid of OMV, make every service docker container and just run my bare linux server with docker containers. Why will I be needing OMV or anyother NAS solution.


    Anyhow thank for the reply...

    Honestly, I don't really disagree w/ you on anything you said. OS's like OMV, FreeNas, etc.. made it where it was fairly easy for someone with a reasonable amount of skill, could run a home server. To me, Docker has narrowed that considerably to people who have literally no Linux knowledge can probably set up a home server with little effort. While I think there will always be a need for something like OMV to run basic services/user management... Because of Docker, realistically I could probably set up an Ubuntu Server in about 90min, vs the 30-45 it takes me to set up OMV.

  • Like I said, unless there is some major deviation from previous releases that he's not told anyone about yet... I don't see why I would be wrong.

    Some of the omv-extras plugins may not upgrade well because originally there was not going to be an upgrade path for OMV 4 to 5. So, basically, people might need to upgrade omv-extras.

    omv 5.5.11 usul | 64 bit | 5.4 proxmox kernel | omvextrasorg 5.3.6
    omv-extras.org plugins source code and issue tracker - github


    Please read this before posting a question.
    Please don't PM for support... Too many PMs!

  • Honestly, even if docker will be used, it should fit into the system conventions. For example, I am advised to use a container in place of webdav plugin in a new thread, because webdav will not be supported in OMV5. I installed it, now I have fiddle with new users, permissions etc. in docker environment. I have make docker volumes attach to the shares and many other tids and bits.


    This corrupts whole nas idea. About, more than ten years ago, I was managing my personal linux servers with samba, nfs, ftp etc. I was tired of these, managing users, shares, permissions in different environments and applications and bought a nas. NAS is supposed to facilitate and enhance. Spinning docker containers from all sources is not solution to the problem.

    I don't think you understand how the webdav plugin worked. It did not solve the terrible user issue you think docker creates. And every other service you listed will never be containerized. Instead of complaining how bad docker is, why not offer to compensate someone for porting the plugin? This project is run by volunteers and I don't even use most of the plugins I write/maintain. If I only did that, you would be really disappointed what plugins were available. Hell, I don't even use docker on OMV.

    omv 5.5.11 usul | 64 bit | 5.4 proxmox kernel | omvextrasorg 5.3.6
    omv-extras.org plugins source code and issue tracker - github


    Please read this before posting a question.
    Please don't PM for support... Too many PMs!

  • Nobody, absolute nobody has told that plugins will be replaced by Docker completely, that's only your impression. Please don't make others crazy with your impression.

    I did not say so, if you read it carefully. That is the "impression" that leaves after reading many posts. Especially the posts of members of development team. There are other discussions in the forum that let us think that way. You, your team had better put your intentions more clearly if you say otherwise. Clear saying something is much different than making no statement.



    Above list let me think the docker direction. I had to dig information from the forum posts and spend many hours, trying to figure out what is goint to happen, posting forums and generating traffic, besides I was not digging for Docker, I was just trying to figure out what to hell happened to the existing plugings in OMV 4 but do not exist OMV5 and what I can do about it.


    I am sorry but I believe this is not my fault but YOURS. I believe have become a scapegoat by pressing sensitive matter. You better make up your mind before whipping new comers.

  • You, your team had better put your intentions more clearly if you say otherwise.

    There is no team. openmediavault is one person - Volker. omv-extras.org is a third party repo maintained by me with very little help. I cannot post something official for openmediavault and he cannot post anything official about omv-extras. When I posted about plugins being converted to docker, I didn't want anyone to get the impression that openmediavault core plugins were following the omv-extras route.


    Above list let me think the docker direction. I had to dig information from the forum posts and spend many hours, trying to figure out what is goint to happen, posting forums and generating traffic, besides I was not digging for Docker, I was just trying to figure out what to hell happened to the existing plugings in OMV 4 but do not exist OMV5 and what I can do about it.

    That would be my fault for not posting more information but I posted once and I just link to that post when someone asks. Most people don't dig for info and just ask again.

    I believe have become a scapegoat by pressing sensitive matter. You better make up your mind before whipping new comers.

    You aren't the scapegoat. You were just starting to sound like there were posts saying all posts were moving to plugins. Since plenty of people would read this, we wanted to make sure that that is not the case. And you aren't being whipped but for a newcomer, you sure don't mind telling us which direction we should be moving in and how everything is wrong with containers. The container movement has been moving for a couple of years. If it is was that bad of an idea, I would think we would have run into many more issues.

    omv 5.5.11 usul | 64 bit | 5.4 proxmox kernel | omvextrasorg 5.3.6
    omv-extras.org plugins source code and issue tracker - github


    Please read this before posting a question.
    Please don't PM for support... Too many PMs!

  • I have reading and checking my options for new deployment for a long time. I watched, read alot. Like most people I looked at freenas and the comparison available freenas vs. omv in their web site. Main thing argument, I think, in the comparision table, to attract new comers, omv is backed by one developer as you verified. I have come to the real test and first one I chose was OMV.


    I admire the work that has been done so far. I wish, I could be help. For the moment, I have decided to stop my OMV journey here. I will probably buy a commercial NAS or build my own.


    Thank you all.

  • I really hope the Docker plugin will be ported to OMV 5 too, this makes setting up containers a lot more user friendly and gives a more "integrated" NAS feeling than opening a separate tool like Portainer in a new window. People who need the extra options Portainer offers can always install a Portainer container.

  • I really hope the Docker plugin will be ported to OMV 5 too, this makes setting up containers a lot more user friendly and gives a more "integrated" NAS feeling than opening a separate tool like Portainer in a new window. People who need the extra options Portainer offers can always install a Portainer container.

    Not gonna happen. At least not the way it is in OMV 4. Now the plugin will simply install docker, and then give you the option of Portainer or Cockpit for container management


    If you've got OMV 4 running, install Portainer and start using it. Once you get the hang of it, you'll find the docker plugin has given you a strong foundation to use Portainer effectively.

  • If you install Portainer you will see the container which have been setup with the docker-gui-plugin. So it is really easy to see the similarities between Portainer and the docker-gui.


    Portainer gives you more options. That is a bit confusing in the beginning.

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!