OS6 now works on x86 Legacy WARNING: NO NTGR SUPPORT!

[demetris]

Hello for the Fan problem on Utra 6 you might find useful this:
http://pkgs.org/debian-wheezy/debian-main-amd64/lm-sensors_3.3.2-2_amd64.deb.html
And you may need these:
http://pkgs.org/debian-wheezy/debian-main-amd64/libc6_2.13-38_amd64.deb.html
http://pkgs.org/debian-wheezy/debian-main-i386/lsb-base_4.1+Debian8_all.deb.html
http://pkgs.org/debian-wheezy/debian-main-amd64/perl_5.14.2-20_amd64.deb.html
http://pkgs.org/debian-wheezy/debian-main-amd64/sed_4.2.1-10_amd64.deb.html

sudo apt-get purge lm-sensors
dpkg -i *.deb
etc
then
#yes "" | sensors-detect

[AMRivlin]

@Demetris
would that also work on Pro6?

[demetris]

@all wearing the new os

[demetris]

Now for LCD controlling you need an LCD display driver 😄
So enjoy:
sudo apt-get install lcdproc

http://lcdproc.org/

http://sourceforge.net/projects/lcdproc/files/lcdproc/0.5.6/

Better than Netgear if you ask me!
http://lcdproc.org/screenshots.php3
Dont know if it sticks though after a firmware update to example V6.0.5.

[demetris]

Ok i got you covered 🙂
I have contacted TheHijacker for porting his app installer on our unsupported machines.
Way better than readynas app center! 10/10 if you ask me!
Read here:
http://forum.xtreamer.net/mediawiki-1.15.1/index.php/ETRAYz_APP_Installer

[mdgm-ntgr]

bajorgensen wrote:
I spoke to an admin in a debian rich environment during the weekend, and he would not touch btrfs until 3.5 kernel. Again, strange decision on Netgear part. btrfs is definetly the future, but why not ship a more mature version.

They are shipping a mature version. Oracle's Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel uses the 3.0.x kernel. Using the same btrfs source they have good btrfs support on kernel 3.0.x and it's a longterm kernel so NetGear has easily been able to add the latest patches to the 3.0.x kernel.

[ivica81]

TheHijacker seems to be a real interesting solution.
Let's see if it can be ported.

[HAVIC]

As others have said it seems that Netgear just does not see that this decision will deter a lot of people from purchasing a new Readynas. I remember when I bought my first Infrant Readynas NV and it came with v2 software and was support all the way to v4 over 4+ years (including netgear when they bought Infrant) this type of support got me to recommend the device to many friends and family. Then I purchased a Ultra 4 plus about 15 months ago assuming that the same kind of support would continue. It was also eluded to in the forums that a new UI interface was in the works and would be coming as stated by some of the Jedi council, which is another reason I bought this unit.
This post also shows that the hardware can support the new OS, but the Netgear business model I guess is to deter customers as this was originally stated as a reason not to support it on the older units.

there are hardware limitations on the previous generations which would need to be overcome.

That quote alone shows the dishonest business practices of Netgear and unless there is a major turn around on Netgears part, they will not be on a list of what I buy or recommend.
I can understand the costs involved to maintain older devices but at $700 for a diskless Ultra 4 Plus unit I think that it can be maintained a little longer than a few minor version tweaks.

Also congrats to all who have gotten os6 running on the older devices and I probably will upgrade once I have time to. Thanks

Greg

[TeknoJnky]

what is really stupid, is that they still have to maintain 4.x for several years.

If they did support os6 on the 64bit devices, they could pretty much drop support 4.x and only support os6.

of course, the 32 bit devices get screwed, but I suppose they were regardless.

[mdgm-ntgr]

For a number of users (particularly business users and those with only one NAS) needing to do a factory default as part of the update process to ReadyNAS OS 6 would be a major reason not to update at least in the short term. If they had provided ReadyNAS OS 6 to existing devices they would have needed a clear plan to phase out support for 4.2.x and make this known to users so that they could prepare.

[AMRivlin]

Or they could have done exactly as they have, but with a bit better PR/outreach and expectation management.

Instead of saying it will not be released "Ever" NTGR could have explained their reasoning, as everyone has debatated in prior posts/threads. Then offer a path to OS6 much like the community has formed through help from our "talented developers".

With NTGR's blessing and outreach for those who are willing to format/wipe their device. ReadyNAS Facebook and support forums would not be tarnished with negativity, and enthusiasts who comment about leaving the brand.

Much as they have over the last year, NTGR has decided their fans and supporters don't need to be informed of these "proprietary" business decisions, since after all, we are just people who bought a device 1-3 years ago, and we aren't a current revenue stream.

All that having been said, I absolutely LOVE OS6, and commend NTGR on their "leap forward" I just wish we had been included in that leap without all the huffing and puffing.

[HAVIC]

But Netgear has already required factory defaults in the past with 4.2.17 to get over the 2TB limitation that was in place. So this is not out of the question of them making the requirements for OS6 be a factory reset as it was with the size limitation issue.

[mdgm-ntgr]

4.2.17? Aren't you confusing this with 4.1.7 for Sparc? There is no requirement to do a factory default to get 4k sector partition alignment on 4.2.x.

[StephenB]

mdgm wrote:
4.2.17? Aren't you confusing this with 4.1.7 for Sparc? There is no requirement to do a factory default to get 4k sector partition alignment on 4.2.x.

And even there, the factory default was not essential, it just improved performance.

[HAVIC]

I was wrong with the version but from http://www.readynas.com/?p=3728

Default file system for all x86 devices is now Ext4. If you factory default the ReadyNAS with 4.2.11, you will get the Ext4 with support for files as large as 16TB on 64-bit ReadyNAS systems (Pro, 3100, 3200, 4200). If you upgrade from Ext3, you’ll still be limited to 2TB. We are looking at coming out with an add-on that allows you to convert your Ext3 file system to Ext4.

[mdgm-ntgr]

That's a requirement for a factory default to add support for individual files (such as iSCSI LUNs) larger than 2TB. From 4.2.12 that support was added to 32-bit devices as well.

[pywong]

If its a money related issues they could just charge for the OS upgrades like with Windows or Mac OS X.
I don't think it's so bad to pay an extra $30 or so for an upgrade.

[chirpa]

Seeing as they can't sort out the $1.99 charges in the 'genie' app store, that will never happen.

[bajorgensen]

mdgm:

They are shipping a mature version. Oracle's Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel uses the 3.0.x kernel. Using the same btrfs source they have good btrfs support on kernel 3.0.x and it's a longterm kernel so NetGear has easily been able to add the latest patches to the 3.0.x kernel.

I should have known not to question mdgm's knowledge... 🙂 UEK kernel indeed!
6.0.0 is based on 3.0, it is just reported as 2.6 for Oracle to maintain RHEL6 compability. Looking at the source:

6.0.0 -> 3.0.57
6.0.1 -> 3.0.57
6.0.2 -> 3.0.68
6.0.3 -> 3.0.?? (points to 6.0.2 source)
6.0.4 -> 3.0.70

I did some Oracle research, and it seems they try to keep a very tight loop between mainline and UEK kernel.
Now, latest Unbreakable Linux is shipping 3.0.36 kernel, so Netgear is actually pulling updates from some heavy development GIT tree from Oracle.
I cannot find this at the OSS GIT hub at https://oss.oracle.com/git/ probably because it has not been released.
Could Netgear be buying dev support from Oracle? hmmmmm

Anyway: Good decision from Netgear! Oracle is backporting btrfs fixes, should have checked the version when I had OS6 for testing.
I wonder what other stuff is in the kernel, do we got KVM/Xen hidden in there? How about containers?
Might be good oppertunitites for 3rd party devs to make some enterprise genie apps here...

[demetris]

I have an answer from TheHijacker:

Redoing the project for new NAS sounds great. But first I would need to get the device myself.Together with vpeter we made a great team.
He took care of the environment to crosscompile applications and I did all the packages using his environment and also took care of coding all the GUIs.
So if you can talk to the company to provide the device I will do my best to bring my project back onto Netgear devices. That is if I get enough support from company and the users itself.
We can start with classic packages like torrent, 1-click downloader and usenet downloaders and then move onto rest...

Let me know what you think.

[steveoelliott]

All of this begs the question, Why aren't Netgear doing this?

Ultimately it has been proven it can be supported but Netgear previously said it couldn't! Surely given the investment we have made, an offical supported upgrade should be offered by them. Even if it was for a fee.

[AMRivlin]

steveoelliott wrote:
All of this begs the question, Why aren't Netgear doing this? Ultimately it has been proven it can be supported but Netgear previously said it couldn't! Surely given the investment we have made, an offical supported upgrade should be offered by them. Even if it was for a fee.

[Arnaud73]

steveoelliott wrote:
Ultimately it has been proven it can be supported but Netgear previously said it couldn't! Surely given the investment we have made, an offical supported upgrade should be offered by them. Even if it was for a fee.

Well it should be free : ReadyNas Ultra and Pro NASes are nothing but cheap. Other providers such as Iomega (see the PR they published yesterday) provide free upgrades to their latests OS for existing devices.

Even if Netgear provides a paid update to RN OS 6 for my Ultra and Duo v2, I will still feel I've been screwed. Would I want to replace my Ultra 4 with a 314 if it should fail? Probably not...

[steveoelliott]

I will too be looking elsewhere.

[ihartley]

Not since the bugs in the new devices seem to be coming thick and fast.... How you develop such a "robust device" so poorly is beyond me.... There again, it's not their data.....