@ajk Hello again and well done on an excellent report.
I’ll respond briefly for now as this is a lot of stuff to address in one go.
Thanks, we now have the following issue to address this:
Agreed. I’ve long resisted this move and have thought of it a number of times. It does seem a little heavy handed as many folks will then have the disadvantage/inelegance of massive text during install; but function must be favoured over form, hence:
This is especially important now given your report that a by-hand addition (our previous suggestion) appears not to work any-longer.
I proposed the use of this same option previously here:
But, alas I have to date not followed through with this seemingly heavy handed approach in our new installer in the hope this was somehow a thing of the past now. Oh well.
Thanks again for the detailed report on this and the confirmation that our current installer no longer works with the previously supplied work-around. Once we have this in place it would be good if you could confirm the fix as I no longer have access to my prior reproducer machine for this AMD video hardware bug.
The btrfs raid5/6 and/or unsupported thing:
Your experience here was a little weird as you likely had some left-overs or some other artifact as you intimate. However our recommendation is not to use the unsupported flag and second guess our upstream but to adopt the backported stable kernel. Hence the following new Howto: https://rockstor.com/docs/howtos/stable_kernel_backport.html
which we link to from our raid profiles section: https://rockstor.com/docs/interface/storage/pools-btrfs.html#redundancy-profiles
via a warning highlighted section.
We also have the following section for mounting ‘poorly’ pools such as yours may have been:
Import unwell Pool: Disks — Rockstor documentation
which in turn allows for an import as the command line mount point (/mnt2/pool-label) is compatible with our import code.
Yes this threw me at first also as I too also thought it was a SLES only thing. @Superfish1000 here talked me round:
Nice find. I’d have thought we already have that one. And if not it should be in the backported stable kernel we suggest for the parity raids. Interesting that you may have encountered this yourself.
Probably best not to use single if you can avoid it. Also note that a Rockstor balance will undo this and enforce dup I think it is on the metadata side if it finds a single data level. We are soon to embark on more flexibility/awareness of custom raid levels re mising and matching between data and metadata to do stuff like data raid6 metadata raid1c4 for 2 disk failure capability whilst avoiding some of the known parity raid issues currently. There is a note on this in the above stable backport kernel how-to.
The newer SAMBA in our upstream no longer enables the earlier smb protocols so you might like to try our newer Rock-on added to help in such browse capabilities added by @Hooverdan via:
as a work around. A related forum thread by @Mike-B to that Rock-on addition is here:
I’m had thought we followed our upstream on this one. And if we disallowed root access then there would be not terminal available before the initial Web-UI setup. Tricky one this as if we go all out on security then we end up being potentially incredibly un-user friendly. I.e. blocking all ports unless a local console (not over network) purposefully opens it before we even have a Web-UI to start folks off. We are an end user appliance not a security device. We have also had suggestions that we have a default user and pass, in fact our new installer has this capability enabled by default but we stick with the console setup to avoid having a default root pass (or none) on every fresh install such as is the case with for example openwrt but we are considerably less constrained in that regard given many folks don’t have a serial-to-usb or the like to gain a terminal. Lets keep an eye on this one as I know opinions vary and we have had to enable some continuity for our prior CentOS based users who also had root ssh by default.
Again thanks for the details feedback. Always lot to improve on but there are at least a couple of easy wins here. We are still transitioning some of our docs to favour/include the new OS base so we do still have some confusing doc entries or out-right outdated/wrong stuff still.