WEB GUI upgrade to 9.3.0.2 will not work

[druco]

According to zoon01 at this post viewtopic.php?f=78&t=7913 the change has new hardware requirements and requires a larger boot partition.

[Lee Sharp]

Download old config. Burn new image to flash. Upload old config. Profit... (Sorry. Got carried away.)

[rbscycle]

I agree! It does not work. System | Firmware | browse to Image | Upgrade. Produces a "The Connection was Reset" Try again!
BTW: This is the first time I have found a "*.img.xz" image. I had to research to find out what to do with a *.XZ file! Coincedence?!

[serverguy]

Trying it tonight (from 9.2.0.1 - Shigawire (revision 972)) and all I can get is that Connection Reset message immediately and no upgrade. Guess I will have to build a new Flash drive tomorrow. What fun...

Is it worth the effort? Anything work significantly better? May not be worth the effort lacking something useful or a big bug fix.

Did nobody notice this complete failure before it was released? Saying it is "problematic" is somewhat light on explanation. Saying it TOTALLY FAILS would be more useful. And mentioning the Connection Reset immediately afterwards would seal the deal and let people know what to expect and that indicates it is impossible. No need to retry, waste time, etc.

Oh, well... nobody being paid to do this stuff. Best effort. Just was not good enough effort this time around. I was never allowed to write code that would not clean up/fix up and install the new release. Failure such as this lead to being fired immediately!

[apollo567]

Well Servergui,

If you read the docs (eg. Changelog) you can see
a) the recommendation not to upgrade but to install from the scratch and restore the config file
b) any other changes.

Kind Regards
Apollo

Trying it tonight (from 9.2.0.1 - Shigawire (revision 972)) and all I can get is that Connection Reset message immediately and no upgrade. Guess I will have to build a new Flash drive tomorrow. What fun...

Is it worth the effort? Anything work significantly better? May not be worth the effort lacking something useful or a big bug fix.

Did nobody notice this complete failure before it was released? Saying it is "problematic" is somewhat light on explanation. Saying it TOTALLY FAILS would be more useful. And mentioning the Connection Reset immediately afterwards would seal the deal and let people know what to expect and that indicates it is impossible. No need to retry, waste time, etc.

Oh, well... nobody being paid to do this stuff. Best effort. Just was not good enough effort this time around. I was never allowed to write code that would not clean up/fix up and install the new release. Failure such as this lead to being fired immediately!

[serverguy]

Yes, a recommendation is not quite as strong as "It will fail, don't even waste any time trying to upgrade". That's the level of support that is really needed. HELP the user. Don't produce pablum. If it fails, let us know so we can go straight to doing the thing that will accomplish the goal.

After wasting time thinking it was "just me", I did just rebuild and am back running on the latest. Reloaded the saved config. It made me re-import the disks and reset the timeouts and SMART checkbox, but it seems to be working. Now fuppesd gets to run all night and see if he can start serving DLNA. I hope it works better than Synology (is more complete). Or, back to Samba...

Thanks to all who produce and distribute this tool. Just please be plainer. If it fails, say it fails so we can get on with it. I am not skilled enough, yet, on this platform to know, for sure, if it is "just me" or a real failure. Much to learn. I appreciate all help in learning and saving time.

Mike

[apollo567]

Yes, a recommendation is not quite as strong as "It will fail, don't even waste any time trying to upgrade". That's the level of support that is really needed. HELP the user. Don't produce pablum. If it fails, let us know so we can go straight to doing the thing that will accomplish the goal.

How to say, it is simply most likely it will fail, there are examples where it worked ....

[serverguy]

Yes, and it is well defined. What I had fails for everyone upgrading from that version. Newer versions upgrade OK. So it was known. There was an incompatibility lurking and no notice of it to us.

Just say exactly that. If you are on 932, it will fail. 1027 (whatever the number was) and higher is OK for upgrade. It is that simple. There is an internal problem which is NOT mentioned. You get a stupid error which is of no help (to some) in diagnosing the problem. Just this disconnected terminal. That's poor.

Enough now. I have done the upgrade and am running fine. Going to bed at 4am. Just slightly frustrated at the lack of more precise instructions/warnings.

Mike

[Cass]

There is an internal problem which is NOT mentioned. You get a stupid error which is of no help (to some) in diagnosing the problem. Just this disconnected terminal. That's poor.

Enough now. I have done the upgrade and am running fine. Going to bed at 4am. Just slightly frustrated at the lack of more precise instructions/warnings.

Sadly I had the same experience and spent far too much time drilling down to the fact that the update function in my 9.x version was just plain old "broken" for most, and that installing from scratch would be the most reliable (and least time-wasting) approach.

I do appreciate the work provided by the NAS4Free dev team gratis, but must keep reminding myself that english is clearly not the first language of many within this community, so supporting documentation and forums should be viewed in that light.