Posts by Palladium

    Hello all,

    I want to install some software alongside OMV5 on my HC2, and as a regular install, not docker or an available plugin. But I have understood that OMV basically assumes to be "alone" on the OS and regularly overwrites system files etc.

    What do I have to consider to not run into trouble? Is there some documentation that I failed to find and you can point out to me?

    Ok, lets just look at the complete output of ip addr:

    I have been meditating over this now for some time, without really coming to a conclusion...

    The only thing I can say is that I can only see ipv4 peers in transmission. And that it is highly unlikely that there are just no ipv6 peers trying to connect.

    Have a look in System Information -> Report, the section Network Interfaces

    Ok, that is the same info as when you type "ip addr" in the terminal. There is one section for the docker:

    5: docker0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state UP group default
    link/ether 02:42:cf:c8:2f:07 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
    inet brd scope global docker0
    valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
    inet6 fe80::42:cfff:fec8:2f07/64 scope link
    valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever

    So it seems ipv6 is already running for docker? I feel stupid now. :/

    Good question. I just assumed it did since it is, well, 2021.

    I want to have ipv6 for transmission because in Germany (where I live) many residential connections are ipv6 only. Those people can only connect to old ipv4 addresses through Carrier-Grade-NAT.

    For everything staying in my local network ipv6 is not needed of course.


    looks like ipv6 is enabled?

    Something involving ipv6 is going on inside the docker. When I look at the logs I see it wants to connect to ipv6 adresses, and can't so creates an error.

    [2021-01-23 10:55:28.946] Couldn't connect socket 60 to 2600:1700:c0b0:52d0::45, port 55784 (errno 99 - Address not available) (/home/buildozer/aports/community/transmission/src/transmission-3.00/libtransmission/net.c:339)
    [2021-01-23 10:55:56.945] Couldn't connect socket 58 to 2a02:2f0e:ca00:c800:750f:741f:a4e8:e326, port 11634 (errno 99 - Address not available) (/home/buildozer/aports/community/transmission/src/transmission-3.00/libtransmission/net.c:339)

    So can I assume that transmission inside the docker is already trying to use ipv6, and it just cant because docker is not letting it through?

    Next question. How do I enable transmission inside docker to reach the outside world via ipv6?

    First I would need to enable ipv6 for docker. I found a guide here, but I do not know if changes on /etc/docker/daemon.json would not be overwritten by OMV5?

    And how to enable ipv6 in transmission itself then?

    No VPN, no. Mainly hosting Linux images and programs, nothing to hide :-)

    I have this table on my router configuration page. It is called UPnP, and you can see that for every portchange there is a new entry in this table (.0.101 is the NAS).


    Anzahl Clients: 11
    Neu laden

    IDDienstbeschreibungExterner PortProtokollInterne IP-AdresseInterner Port
    1Transmission at 1981819818TCP192.168.0.10119818
    2Transmission at 1981819818UDP192.168.0.10119818
    3Transmission at 5066550665TCP192.168.0.10150665
    4Transmission at 5066550665UDP192.168.0.10150665
    5WhatsApp (1610814412) ()38831UDP192.168.0.10338831
    7Transmission at 4860248602TCP192.168.0.10148602
    8Transmission at 4860248602UDP192.168.0.10148602

    But I do not remember where my preference for random ports comes from, I just always had it like that. Maybe some installation guide trying to obfuscate traffic through that. Makes no sense to me today, I will just go with a static port and open that in the router.

    No. When transmission was running as an extension in OMV4 I did not have to. The port would be opened by UPnP automatically. Thats what I wanted here also, as I wanted to use random ports at startup.

    I guess that's what I will have to do then and keep the port static.

    Ok, next problem. I can not get portforwarding to work with my transmission docker. When I test the port from within transmission Remote GUI I get this error message:

    This is the port I configured in the stack, so that is correct. Can it be that whatever magic UPnP or whatever does is not working through the boundaries of the container? I don't really know what to do next.

    Hello all,

    I just upgraded from OMV4 to OMV5. Since there is no transmission extension in OMV5 anymore I used docker. Working ok so far. I have one problem though:

    I am using remote GUI on all the various machines in the house to control transmission. One very handy feature is path mapping. That enables you to just click on a download in the GUI and it opens the folder it is in. It is necessary to translate the internal path that transmission sees to the equivalent path that the client sees, like so:

    That does not work anymore if transmission is running inside docker. What can I do?

    Ok, did not have time to pursue this for a while, but did so now. Using the Minimal image worked ok, no issues until now. Thank you for the information. I wanted to keep the downtime as short as possible, as the whole family has become very used to the comforts of network attached storage and services like a DLNA music server. A prolonged interruption of this service would have resulted in unpleasant consequences for me.

    ..In the guide section of the forum, the fourth listing down has the latest guide for installing OMV5 on an arm board.

    Thats exactly the one I was following. But the install is pretty straightforward: check your sd card, download image, check hash, flash image, first boot, ssh update upgrade reboot, ssh run omv install script, after reboot web ui is available (from memory). The guide is useful for default passwords, copying the installscript and so on. Written for Windows users, so you have to find the equivalent tools to use if you are on Linux. Many can be used on both platforms, like Balena Etcher and Putty.

    I am working off of a pdf that I got somewhere here called "addendum A: Installing OMV5 on Armbian SBC's". That is basically describing the same thing. Only that I have to substitute all the windows-software used in the guide with the Linux equivalent.... the process is pretty basic, no mystery there, just using it to see if any unusual things have to be considered along the way. Seems not. So that is a yes to your question. The guide just fails to make a mention of the two available options of Armbian Buster (or I failed to find it), and I did not find this info anywhere else.

    So my question was rather: is the Buster Minimal missing anything I would need for OMV5, and is it playing nice with the 5.4.83 kernel it comes with?

    Hello all,

    about to upgrade from OMV4 to 5 and want to do a clean install. The Armbian website offers me two different versions of Buster for the Odroid HC2 to download: the regular version with a 4.14.y Kernel and the Minimal version with a 5.4.y Kernel. Both are considered stable. Which one do I take? Can I use minimal, and if yes, should I?


    Then attempt an upgrade to 5.x.

    I have considered this, and if this would just be an attempt to get everything running again as soon as possible I would probably try your scripts. But then again, if I would go for the least effort needed I would probably have bought a ready made NAS and be done with it. I am considering this more to be a "hobby" type of thing, so I want to understand and learn by diving in a little bit deeper.

    To come back to my original question: during the install I can keep the data HDD connected, it should not be altered and if something goes wrong I can still put the old OMV 4 sd card back in and have a running system. Very good.

    As for the users and shares: when originally I set up OMV 4 I created users, but got confused by access rights in SMB and how they go together with ACL etc., and basically gave up. So right now everything is made fully accessible for the guest account. That was all ok when it was only me and my wife accessing it, but as the kids get older I actually want to have a little more control. So this will be my chance to have a go at it again and actually have an access control.

    But as I understand it: as soon as I start to alter access rights on the new install it will have an effect on the files on the HDD, right? So from that point on there is no going back to the way it was by just sticking the old sd card in? That would be the point of no return?