How to install WebDAV on the OMV5?

  • As there is no /conf, Maybe inside the container
    docker exec -it webdav bash


    https://docs.docker.com/engine/reference/commandline/exec/


    i am sorry, i am maybe stupid :). Do you know how can I get into the container?

    Code
    pi@raspberrypi:~ $ find . -name httpd.conf
    pi@raspberrypi:~ $ find / -type d httpd.conf
    find: paths must precede expression: `httpd.conf'
    pi@raspberrypi:~ $ docker exec -it webdav bash
    OCI runtime exec failed: exec failed: container_linux.go:346: starting container process caused "exec: \"bash\": executable file not found in $PATH": unknown
    pi@raspberrypi:~ $
  • I have no problem to create the webdav docker on OMV4 or 5 but I do not know how to configure it to use my videos share (/sharedfolders/Videos) as root for webdav.


    I use bytemark docker


    any help?

  • Instead of /srv/dav:/var/lib/dav, you would use /sharedfolders/Videos:/var/lib/dav

    still no work, I tested on OMV 4, and there is my docker config:



    I use /srv/dev-disk-by-label.../data/dokers but is the same for .../Videos always show empty root folder "/"

  • I know this thread is a little old, but I'm just now making the jump from OMV4 to OMV5.


    When the answer to "how do I enable this feature that was easy in version 4?" is simply "go find a docker image," it's time to find an alternative to OMV.


    If I wanted to figure out which generic docker image works with my system, and how to make that generic docker image work with my system's folder structure and quirks, I would have just started with docker. This defeats the purpose of something like OMV.

  • When the answer to "how do I enable this feature that was easy in version 4?" is simply "go find a docker image," it's time to find an alternative to OMV.

    Why? Because it isn't as easy?


    If I wanted to figure out which generic docker image works with my system, and how to make that generic docker image work with my system's folder structure and quirks, I would have just started with docker. This defeats the purpose of something like OMV.

    You are over-exaggerating. OMV still has lots of plugins to do storage things that a NAS is supposed to do. The docker images are for services like downloaders that aren't the true purpose of a NAS. If you can come up with a solution that doesn't use docker, I'm open to hear it. But telling me that plugins are the only way or else OMV is useless is not helping anything. I don't have time to maintain or desire to maintain or use downloader plugins that belong in docker anyway.

    omv 5.5.17-2 usul | 64 bit | 5.4 proxmox kernel | omvextrasorg 5.4.2
    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!

  • Why? Because it isn't as easy?


    You are over-exaggerating. OMV still has lots of plugins to do storage things that a NAS is supposed to do. The docker images are for services like downloaders that aren't the true purpose of a NAS. If you can come up with a solution that doesn't use docker, I'm open to hear it. But telling me that plugins are the only way or else OMV is useless is not helping anything. I don't have time to maintain or desire to maintain or use downloader plugins that belong in docker anyway.

    Yeah, I was probably being over-dramatic. I came here to find how to enable Webdav to access a shared folder. To me, that's just another way to access your shares, like SMB or NFS, so I expected it to be part of the base NAS config. I have OMV4 running in VMWare and I'm replacing it with a physical box (an old Chromebox) running OMV5. I'm sure I can figure out how to share a folder with a Webdav container, but it would have been nice to just check a box.


    I also have a RPi running OMV4, not as a NAS at all, but running dnsmasq for DHCP and DNS serving about 8 networks, nginx as a reverse proxy for a bunch of services/applications, and letsencrypt to secure said services/applications. You're right that these aren't really core services for a NAS, but I really liked having all the configs right there in the OMV interface. I'll probably just leave that one running OMV4 for a while and hope I run across something else that integrates those things with a coherent gui.

  • eah, I was probably being over-dramatic. I came here to find how to enable Webdav to access a shared folder. To me, that's just another way to access your shares, like SMB or NFS, so I expected it to be part of the base NAS config. I have OMV4 running in VMWare and I'm replacing it with a physical box (an old Chromebox) running OMV5. I'm sure I can figure out how to share a folder with a Webdav container, but it would have been nice to just check a box.


    I also have a RPi running OMV4, not as a NAS at all, but running dnsmasq for DHCP and DNS serving about 8 networks, nginx as a reverse proxy for a bunch of services/applications, and letsencrypt to secure said services/applications. You're right that these aren't really core services for a NAS, but I really liked having all the configs right there in the OMV interface. I'll probably just leave that one running OMV4 for a while and hope I run across something else that integrates those things with a coherent gui.

    I would love to have more time to port every plugin to every version of OMV. Unfortunately, the webdav plugin was very inflexible and not many people used it. Never used webdav myself. So, it was cut.


    I didn't mind the dnsmasq plugin but it was complicated. And most people are running pihole or adguard in a docker now. So, it was cut.


    The nginx plugin was a support nightmare. Too many people screwed up their OMV web interface using. It was also complicated. nginx is great but hosting sites on the internet should not share the same web server as the omv web interface. So, it made more sense to run in docker and the plugin was cut.


    letsencrypt is very complicated and rapidly moving. The version of certbot in the Debian repos is too far behind. So, this plugin better in docker as well and cut.


    I realize some of these are popular plugins but I think I have good reasons for not continuing to maintain them. If someone can convince me otherwise, I'll think about it. Even commerical NASes are adding docker now.

    omv 5.5.17-2 usul | 64 bit | 5.4 proxmox kernel | omvextrasorg 5.4.2
    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!

  • Thanks for the explanations (which you didn't owe me at all), and thanks for all the work you've done maintaining the software..


    Now that I've cooled off, I understand and respect your decisions. I can't imagine that Webdav is really that popular and I can find an alternative. I just used it because it was an easy way to stick a file in a folder and give someone a link and credentials to download it. I can use SFTP to do the same thing, but not everyone has an SFTP client already installed. I can still do SMB, NFS, and SFTP out of the box so I'm good.


    And I shouldn't complain about my RPi that's running NAS software and not acting as a NAS. I just got lucky that the services I needed were right there in OMV4. I will have to find another solution for that eventually, but that's not your problem. You're maintaining a NAS product, not a DHCP/reverse-proxy server.


    If I may offer a suggestion, a wizard where you select a shared folder (and maybe a few more options) and it builds a Webdav docker container configured to expose the appropriate folder would be just as good as a plugin. Maybe a framework where users could submit wizards to build containers like downloaders, media servers (e.g. Plex), etc. so each user doesn't have to learn docker to do common things with OMV. Maybe even some or all existing plugins could become docker wizards, if maintaining a wizard turns out to be less work than a plugin. Just a thought; I'm not sure if this is really feasible.

  • If I may offer a suggestion, a wizard where you select a shared folder (and maybe a few more options) and it builds a Webdav docker container configured to expose the appropriate folder would be just as good as a plugin. Maybe a framework where users could submit wizards to build containers like downloaders, media servers (e.g. Plex), etc. so each user doesn't have to learn docker to do common things with OMV. Maybe even some or all existing plugins could become docker wizards, if maintaining a wizard turns out to be less work than a plugin. Just a thought; I'm not sure if this is really feasible.

    I've thought about that. omv-extras is basically doing that with portainer and yacht right now. So, the only thing I worry about is people complaining about what image is being used and/or what apps are available and/or what config the plugin would allow. I'll think about it a bit more. My biggest concern is that I don't use any downloaders and wouldn't really want to maintain the code for those.

    omv 5.5.17-2 usul | 64 bit | 5.4 proxmox kernel | omvextrasorg 5.4.2
    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've thought about that. omv-extras is basically doing that with portainer and yacht right now. So, the only thing I worry about is people complaining about what image is being used and/or what apps are available and/or what config the plugin would allow. I'll think about it a bit more. My biggest concern is that I don't use any downloaders and wouldn't really want to maintain the code for those.

    If you could write a framework where users could build a wizard and share it with the community, then you wouldn't need to maintain any of them (well, maybe a few core services). You just need to allow a power user to script a settings page (maybe in yaml), where the end user can select things like shared folders, and build docker settings (maybe a docker-compose file) from the selections.


    Portainer does let you build a container from a template, but it doesn't integrate the settings with OMV objects.

  • If you could write a framework where users could build a wizard and share it with the community, then you wouldn't need to maintain any of them (well, maybe a few core services). You just need to allow a power user to script a settings page (maybe in yaml), where the end user can select things like shared folders, and build docker settings (maybe a docker-compose file) from the selections.

    That would be difficult to implement in a plugin since there needs to be a combo of javascript and php code. I don't know of a way to populate web interace objects from a yaml (or anything else) file. A normal plugin is almost what you are describing. Maybe that will be easier with OMV 6.x.

    omv 5.5.17-2 usul | 64 bit | 5.4 proxmox kernel | omvextrasorg 5.4.2
    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!

Participate now!

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