NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
Sandshark
Apr 11, 2023Sensei
How I got apt update and install to work (with Debian Jessie retired)
OK, so I started off creating my own local Debian repository. Not recommended -- it's a lot of work. But with a lot of Googling and experimenting, I finally got apt to work using an online source. ...
Langzik_NAS
Mar 18, 2024Guide
I have no idea why you need the -f option to install nano
One NAS device in particular is a problem-child for me (I can't even get SMB to work on it anymore; not sure how or why, but it's a major pain-point). This was probably the first device I applied to patch to, so it likely gave me issues, after which point I'll have simply opted to apply the -f flag by default when installing it on the other NAS device.
[as for the rest...]
I agree with everything you said; I understand the motive, but disagree with the outcome/execution they opted for. It would've been better for them to inform the user via disclaimer and create a switch of sorts to turn off app functionality based on the user's preference & risk appetite. Moreover, it's crazy that they didn't even give a warning window prior to the user applying the update. Most of us assume updates are here to fix bugs & issues, but rarely do we consider a situation where a core function is simply torn out of OS... Anyway, I could go on forever, but I know I'm preaching to the choir here lol. My point is simply that the update's outcome was wildly unacceptable in my view; it should never have happened, and they should've restored what they broke immediately after, when users became confused, alarmed, and steeped in regret. Now they'll have a chunk of users who are either:
- cursing their product [not knowing the situation, but knowing the outcome],
- frustrated [because they realize what's happened, but don't have the technical confidence/competence to fix it], or
- feeling distrust towards Netgear/ReadyNAS [knowing what happened, having reverse-engineered the outcome, and having turned off all update-related activity].
All of these outcomes are damaging for not only the users & ReadyNAS, but also Netgear [in regard to reputation & reliability]. For example, every time I think about Netgear now, I'll be thinking about this issue; how can I recommend Netgear's products as a solution to anything/anyone in the future? They'd REALLY have to do something special to woo me... and even then, I'd [unfortunately] have a very hard time trusting them now.
DanielEnochsson
Sep 20, 2024Tutor
Edit - Looks like I failed to quote the post I responded to, but it was in reply to this:
"every time I think about Netgear now, I'll be thinking about this issue; how can I recommend Netgear's products as a solution to anything/anyone in the future? They'd REALLY have to do something special to woo me... and even then, I'd [unfortunately] have a very hard time trusting them now."
Myself, I will always think of Netgear with great appreciation after they spent weeks on my out-of-support NAS, helping me recover almost all of my unbacked-up data (yes, I know...) after a dual-disk failure showed up. Initial state was completely bricked and in the end, I lost maybe 50 files, but I knew which ones they were. I think my disks may even have been outside of the recommended hardware list...
The problem in this thread is indeed a disappointment, but at least I managed to recover apt functionality with the good advice from Sandshark and others. I'll see if I want to downgrade to 6.10.9 later, but I'll leave my two NASes on 6.10.10 for now.
Related Content
NETGEAR Academy
Boost your skills with the Netgear Academy - Get trained, certified and stay ahead with the latest Netgear technology!
Join Us!