Posts by HannesJo

    There are good arguments for btrfs, and good arguments against it. One of the latter is that it requires you to think differently about your disk space, as seen here:

    https://www.linuxquestions.org…-docker-btrfs-4175622037/


    I'm all for new features. But things are a little different when you have a whole concept that you've worked with over decades turned on it's head, and forcing that concept on every user's machines.


    Yeah I agree. Furthermore there are still some major issues. So I do understand that some people are critical of it. But under the condition that the major issues have been fixed by the release of omv 6, I do have a positive feeling about that.

    So what I did was to attach the disk, wait until the usb backup job was finished, then mount it by the WebUI (without deattaching the disk in the meantime), then unmount it. After that everything was fine again.


    Yeah I actually did the same. Have tried it again, worked. Guess I missed pressing apply, like macom said. Sometimes I wonder how foolish I can get. Thanks! 8o

    Just noticed that one of my usb backup disks is always displayed as missing after I have detached it. I can reattach and use it and detach again, making sure it was unmounted. But it is displayed as missing again.

    Any ideas what is going on here? How does OMV actually decide if a disk is missing?

    From your response I see that I should leave ext4 ^^

    I`ve read many articles, but if someone mentioned that he had 0 free space after writing and removing many files and he need to clean up free space manually, another person will write that everything is fine and no issue at all. :cursing:


    The point is that there are several "no space left" bugs. Most of them are fixed since kernel 5.x but there is also one present in kernel 5.4 only.

    (see BTRFS no space left - kernel 5.4 bug)


    I actually would recommend to experiment with btrfs first. Do not simply switch your main storage / system to it without being save in its usage!

    You should be aware of bugs existent in the kernel U use. There a lots of fixes provided in almost every kernel update released.


    In general it is a good idea to run one of the latest stable kernels. Unfortunately the easy to use proxmox kernel provided with OMV Extras plugin are at 5.4.x and as mentioned above, this one has some problems with btrfs. For this reason I am using a mainline kernel (5.6). Doing so one must be aware of other problems as this kernel is not debian supported officially.

    (see How to install new Kernel on OMV from Source)


    And last but not least: ALWAYS HAVE A DATA BACKUP - A RAID IS NO BACKUP!

    Adoby I really do not know what you are talking about. I never said anything about a schedule and I never thought about anything like that.


    I explained very specifically what I personally did not like in the devs communication on stable status. This is an opinion and I do not claim that everyone agrees with me. If you disagree, fine. But I am not in the mood for the next discussion about someones interpreting things in my posts that are simply not there.

    Think I cannot really help out here unfortunately. That depends on your modem and router and their configuration. I would recommend at first testing a standalone nextcloud setup and access it from your local network. If that works, try to access it via internet using your duckDNS domain. If that works, letsencrypt should work also unless your network is blocking some connections. You could also try to google that specifig error and/or ask letsencrypt devs.

    I really missed the way you totally miss my point but suddenly change the subject in discussions and then think that this would support your point of view.


    Yes, the analogy is similar. Yes, it is how it is. You are a friend of messages with an information entropy H=0 and now we know that your wife is ok with that. Good for you! She is very patient with you.


    But that has nothing to do with my criticism, unfortunately.

    And yet this how it is.

    I'm putting in posts and an electric fence around my garden right now, to keep deer and other little furry wood land creatures out. When my wife asks me when it will be done, I reply; "when it's done". (I don' t itemize the list of tasks remaining or provide her with a schedule.)
    Of course she's free to chip in, if she chooses, to have it ready sooner rather than later. Otherwise? It's done, when it's done.


    ^^ Yeah and what do you mean would be the reaction of your wife? Perhaps sth like "Ah thanks for the kind conversation!". And you would know what she actually meant. ;)

    That is the politician way of speak. Speaking without saying anything.

    You need no duckDNS token as you not using auth method duckDNS but http. I think it must have sth to do with your modem/router/firewall configuration, then. There is that message "Timeout during connect (likely firewall problem)". Are you using a firewall? Have you tried setting up nextcloud standalone? It seems like letsencrypt is trying to confirm your subdomain.domain but is not able to connect via that address. Therefore it is not going to grant your certificate.

    Such problems are almost always file/folder permission problem. Just starting over may help for the moment but you are going to encounter such problems very often as long as you have no basic knowledge of permissions.


    When I am in a situation where I cannot create files or folders although I should, I open the terminal/ssh, go to that location and check the file perms using

    > ls -la

    Hmm no please dont change anything in that upper section. These ACL settings are only needed for very complex setups. The lower section shows that everyone on that machine should have full access to this folder. That is ok! Your sharedfolder privileges look good too.


    Lets have a look into your smb share config. You have set "Public: Only Guests". Here is the point why you can access as guest only.

    You can find more information about these options here: https://www.samba.org/samba/do…l/smb.conf.5.html#GUESTOK

    Sorry I deleted my answer because I did not notice all the previous comments.


    First thing: Your URL must only be duckdns.org. Under SUBDOMAINS you must set eg. nextcloud.mon-serveur,hassio.mon-serveur,etc..


    You have to specify where you want to have the config folder. E.g. /sharedfolders/AppData/letsencrypt. Then start the container. It will automatically create and fill the folder. Then you can stop the container again, go to proxy conf and edit it.


    There is no need to create any networks from shell anymore. This can be done in your docker-compose file (Your stack config). And again, you should at first try a minimum setup. Here you can have my current working docker-compose config:

    (Note: I am using different uid and gid but that should not be your problem)


    Yes I also have my own projects where I do it like this. If I am asked if I would describe project x as stable already, I can give a short overview. "No, there are still too many users who have problems with it" or "No, there are still missing features", "No, feature Y still has a serious problem. It may take a few more months." That would be a transparent approach. Of course you can be more or less precise, depending on the situation.


    "As soon as possible" is not a transparent approach. This answer has an informational content = 0.

    There also is a way without deleting old sharedfolders and their references to any services using terminal/ssh. Just mount the new drive, rsync all data from the old to the new one using e.g.

    > rsync -aAP /srv/_OLDDRIVE_/sharedfolderX /srv/_NEWDRIVE_


    Then the location of each sharedfolder can be changed in the OMV GUI. A warning is displayed that the data must be copied manually (done). After that the old drive can be removed.


    EDIT: Sorry I did not notice this thread is about omv 0.2. This way is only tested with omv 4 and 5.

    I don't know what the problem is here. I just expressed my opinion that a little more transparency in the requirements for the stable label would have been nice. I specifically emphasized that this is not an attack. Then answers come back like "This is just MY decision" or "You were free to use OMV 5 long before it was officially stable. [...] I suggest ignoring the development/test phases.". Things that nobody questioned. Well, it looks like something about my question offended both of you. Sorry about that. I didn't mean to.