Posts by bifferos

I didn't really do it for speed, there's almost no setup, and permissions are the perms of the shell at each end. If rsync works for you then go for it. this was a one-off.

I'm interested to know why you'd migrate from FreeNAS on an old system to OMV on a new system. I see the main benefits of OMV as being Debian-based (familiarity) or because it uses fewer resources/power than FreeNAS (16GB now recommended, 8GB is fine). That said, I'm just in the process of transferring data from my Synology and I'm using netcat.

https://blog.codybunch.com/202…Synology-Tar-over-NetCat/

With the speeds I'm seeing I would imagine 1.4TB won't take that long.

thanks, I just switched to v5. It's working much better for me.

I did the same with OMV 5.6.13 and it works fine.

Firstly, sorry for posting a lot of questions lately. Maybe I'm not supposed to be looking at the beta version and should switch to the stable, but I had some problems enabling SMART on my physical machine so I decided to try with VirtualBox instead, and then I got the below. Is this expected? I know people have got SMART working in Proxmox so maybe I should be doing my testing in that it's just VirtualBox is much faster and more convenient. Thanks!

That looks like this in text:

 500 - Internal Server Error
Failed to execute command 'export PATH=/bin:/sbin:/usr/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/local/sbin; export LANG=C.UTF-8; omv-salt deploy run --no-color smartmontools 2>&1' with exit code '1': debian: ---------- ID: configure_default_smartmontools Function: file.managed Name: /etc/default/smartmontools Result: True Comment: File /etc/default/smartmontools is in the correct state Started: 22:52:47.733427 Duration: 16.578 ms Changes: ---------- ID: divert_default_smartmontools Function: omv_dpkg.divert_add Name: /etc/default/smartmontools Result: True Comment: Leaving 'local diversion of /etc/default/smartmontools to /etc/default/smartmontools.distrib' Started: 22:52:47.750240 Duration: 5.584 ms Changes: ---------- ID: configure_smartd_conf Function: file.managed Name: /etc/smartd.conf Result: True Comment: File /etc/smartd.conf is in the correct state Started: 22:52:47.755941 Duration: 21.307 ms Changes: ---------- ID: divert_smartd_conf Function: omv_dpkg.divert_add Name: /etc/smartd.conf Result: True Comment: Leaving 'local diversion of /etc/smartd.conf to /etc/smartd.conf.distrib' Started: 22:52:47.777315 Duration: 5.388 ms Changes: ---------- ID: start_smartmontools_service Function: service.running Name: smartmontools Result: False Comment: Service sma...

That's a clue then. It's logging me out and logging me back in again when I click on 'network'. Or was when I didn't have a private window Hmmm....

Also, I seem to have lost the SMART service after this. I don't know if it's related. Ah... I think I'm going to try a reinstall.

Well, I'm not going to knock it if it works! it's just that it's not working very well for me, so I thought maybe this is part of the problem. It looks unintended because there's already the spinner, so not really a need to change the cursor, most people would do one or the other.

I seem to be getting some errors after trying to upgrade (immediately after install), just wondering if I need to worry about this?

Good call. New private window seems to fix it. But it's really odd. I get the cursor changing to this strange timer that looks really out of place in the otherwise slick GUI

I get the spinner, it says 'Loading' and then it leaves me back at the root location.

I see the sub-items in the left-hand menu briefly appear and then disappear.

Any ideas?

And finally, if you want to reproduce the problem you can do it in VirtualBox. Simply setup pfsense (I used version 2.5.2 CE) with a private network one side and your normal LAN the other. Create an OMV virtual machine on the private network. You don't even need to configure anything, out of the box pfsense will give the private network an environment where OMV install fails. Once the Router mode is set to disabled, or the dhcpv6 server is started, the install succeeds.

For others that may encounter this issue, it appears this is the result of a single setting in my router. I had enabled ipv6, but disabled DHCPv6.

It's not the overall ipv6 enabling but I believe the RA setting just below it which would have been activated.

You can read about the RA modes here: https://docs.netgate.com/pfsen…ervices/dhcp/ipv6-ra.html

Once the ipv6 setting was off (or conversely the dhcpv6 server switched on) everything worked.

I think that the presence of RA signals the Debian net cfg code to persistently try to get an address, and that may be a bug in that it just doesn't support the so-called 'router only' mode, but I've more reading to do about ipv6 before I can be sure.

I am using DHCP. I think the problem is it's serving an ipv4 address, but it's not serving correctly the ipv6.

Maybe I didn't express myself very clearly there. I mean I'd like to understand the problem. Who knows, maybe contribute a fix? It's not like I want to spend a week on it, but I have some free time tonight.

Yes, that's my last resort. I've not disabled DHCP completely, just on my DSL router, I've still got a proxmox VM with DHCP/DNS on it on the same network. I assign the IP address (which is static) via a specific MAC and that's usually how I setup most home machines.

I've now tried killing the dhclient process (it forks so there are two PIDs to kill, no killall in th alt-f2 shell), and that does seem to allow the install to complete and networking is OK. Just tested that in VirtualBox Bridged. So that's my fallback. I'm mystified why there's a problem though. I added the line

dhcp-range=2001:db8::02, 2001:db8::ff,12h

to my /etc/dnsmasq.conf hoping it might serve some addresses.

tcpdump shows some ipv6 activity from the MAC of the OMV VM but I'm not an expert on it so it doesn't make much sense to me.

There was this:

ICMP6, neighbor solicitation, length 32, who has fe80::a00:2eff:ff2e:7f9f
      unknown option (14), length 8 (1): 
        0x0000:  2276 3220 c2aa

Going to try to investigate a bit more....

I think this has been discussed elsewhere. I remember seeing this and posting before about it, I think at the time I just dropped the idea of using OMV because I couldn't be bothered and installed FreeNAS. Now I decided to try a bit harder.

Install into VirtualBox with nat network works fine.

Install into VirtualBox with bridged network does not work.

I remember when I was installing into Proxmox it wouldn't work either, but I only ever create VMs in Proxmox with bridged networking.

So there is something 'shitty' about my network, or at least there's something upsetting OMV, and it must relate to ipv6. Or so I assume.

I tried installing without configuring the network (cable unplugged), but my first attempt at this left me with no networking on boot. I wondered if I should try to 'fix' my network instead.

So I took a look at my broadband router. I've got an arrangement where I've disabled the DHCP on the router, and I run Dnsmasq for this. So the router is only ever doing routing, I control my DHPC/DNS outside of that. I don't see any ipv6 settings for DNSMasq that would make any difference here.

So I thought I would post to see if anyone has any ideas. Are there specific settings I'm looking for either on Dnsmasq or my router that I can play around with for instance?

Thanks!

Quote from ryecoaaron

So why not use the checksums? - https://sourceforge.net/projec…nmediavault/files/5.6.13/

Because they're on the mirrors.

Quote from ryecoaaron

There is only one developer - votdev. He puts the ISOs and checksums on the sourceforge page. The "official" download page just links to the iso on the sourceforge page that I linked to above. I guess he could put the link for the checksum file on the download page but like many of the things you linked to that are doing it "right", the url checksum is the just the iso url + ".sha256"

In any of the links I gave the digest is distinct from the mirror location. Sure, you can have the digest on the mirror as well if you want but you need the single source of truth to do it the 'right' way IMHO.

Listen, I can understand if nobody wants to do this. It seems as though the main download page can stay static this way, so each release is less work, because it refers to the public key, instead of to the digest of the actual release. But perhaps the public key itself should also be there along with the fingerprint because you don't really want people importing the public key from what may be a compromised location, and then trusting that going forward. They should check the fingerprint before they do that, but again extra work where they may as well have just checked the digest in the first place. Of course this is all assuming sourceforge gets compromised which is unlikely.

Quote from ryecoaaron

Didn't we already kill this issue? If you are worried about the ISO and the checksum being altered, then just check the signature since that is on the official (not a mirror) download page - https://www.openmediavault.org/download.html

I'd find it useful to have the sha/md5 checksums. I'd verify the ISO in seconds and it would be a one-step process (a single command execution) instead of a key download and three commands. I went through exactly the same process as Jonathan L in trying to understand what I was supposed to do and I think the reason is because it's actually doing more than I need (I don't need/want to import anything). My feature request still stands and I believe it's a valid one unless you think all the other people providing this info are somehow wrong. If the developers won't do it it's fine, but if you never ask you don't get!

I've just started looking at OMV and this was also my first question. I was looking for a simple sha256 that I could get from the download page, and then check that against the actual ISO image I download. Sha2-256 is available on practically every machine I use, it's simple it would give enough reassurance and many distros do this:

Ubuntu:

https://ubuntu.com/download/de…0.04.3&architecture=amd64

AntiX:

https://antixlinux.com/download/

OpenSuSE:

https://get.opensuse.org/tumbleweed/?type=desktop#download

Mint:

https://linuxmint.com/edition.php?id=292

They all have the ISO on random mirror, but the checksums are all in a specific place (the source of the mirrors one would assume). I think the key thing here, is that if someone changes the checksums someone will probably notice. Because many people would be viewing them and testing them. Whereas it may be easier to change an ISO on one random mirror (updating accompanying checksum) out of a few dozen possibles and it wouldn't be spotted so easily. No point in storing the checksums on any mirrors if you do this, you actually want people to be constantly checking the *original* checksums against the ISOs they download wherever from.

I hope that the developers will consider providing this in the future, if for no other reason than to avoid questions like this :).

Thanks!