Recommended Posts

In fact my release works fine but I think I will keep it for me for several reasons :

 

blah blah...

 

We're here to sharing.

When someone don't want so seed, it's the time they should to leave...

 

Sorry for my bad English...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the way I see it, he created his own cooked off version of 4.3 and he cited very good reasons why not th share it.

 

love the potential, however, the risk/state of the development is at best questionable

 

had 4.2 running on esxi, can't afford the security risks!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reasons are good indeed , but ...

 

this is me or he's suggesting that only script kiddies are using this forum ?!

 

Why not help 4.2 maintainers to port 4.3 ? I believe Trantor is still there, and he's not alone.

This forum has technical threads, and knowledge should be shared in my opinion.

 

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dead? no. I'm running 4.3 files I provided with smallupdates applied. 20 users, 10TB of data, 5 IP cameras, Plex server, all works fine. It CAN be usable. But still waiting for VeNoM's release.

 

+1

 

Thus I'm using Trantor's 3211 beta2a inside ESXi (which took some time to be released), I'm fine with it and everything works great. I was even contented for a while with 3202, no problem. I have enough patience for 4.3 inside ESXi and sooner or later some of the devs in here will release it! :ugeek:

 

PS: Chill out and don't make them nervous :evil:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In fact my release works fine but I think I will keep it for me for several reasons :

and I have to disagree with you, on various points:

1/ syno put some verification so they don't want the dsm been installable on a cheaper system.

But that does not stop us, right? By the way, the term "cheaper systems" might not be correct - lets say, unauthorized systems.

2/ if it spread on the internet as a ready to use release, syno will certainly add more check in next release.

It is not that widespread. I'd bet my kidneys that only 5-10% of the DSM runners are actually on unofficial hardware. The largest clients of Synology are bigger companies covering simple server functions - they cannot just get a hacked release from the internet and run it. And those purchases are HIGH compared to the personal ones.

We have a small-ish electronics store in my town, and I have talked with the guys working there (they sell some barebone and ready-to-use NAS from ReadyNAS, WD, Synology, and some other brands). They said that the Synology sales outnumber the barebones sales about 1:5.

 

Besides, we are doing it for this kind of fun, aren't we? Hack it, then look out for Synology, see what they got to throw at us next time. Every release has a disclaimer that it might break, etc., so everyone uses it at their own responsibility. You can post your build, write some nice text that it is a one-time release, no updates, no fixes, etc., and nobody can have a word.

3/ all on this thread give enough information to create your own working system.

For you, maybe. But the number of technically savvy people on these boards is quite limited. Hell, even me, whom I consider quite experienced with IT, couldn't recreate your method :grin: (but that's mostly because I don't know how to C++). So yes, there are like, 5-6 guys who can recreate what you did, and that's it.

4/ I don't recommend dsm for kiddies as update could break the system

These people are not kiddies. They are tinkerers too, waiting to try the latest new stuff. We are aware that any update can break the system, delete our data, cause nuclear armageddon, blow the planet up, or eradicate the planet from time and space in every continuity, yes. That's why I wouldn't install it on a live system, but for playing around...

5/ the kernel modification need to be included if they update the kernel and I don't want to be the maintainer.

I'm pretty sure that if you gave a sound solution to base on, someone (looking at Trantor right now :mrgreen: ) would take it over and maintain it, patching it up to the latest.

6/ it's easy to create a Trojan horse release, with backdor in it, that's why I create my own release from scratch. As it's a borderline project, I suggest to only install code you can trust.

And that's why we have trusted releasers. I for one only installed releases from this forum, from people who actually cared to update their products. Plus I never store sensitive information on my NAS, it is only for movies, pictures, etc.

 

So to sum up its great if you are familiar with Linux and understood all of the things in this thread. Dsm check can be defeated for the moment. I take responsibility on my own hardware if it failed, I never support this release for others.

That's what disclaimers are for. You don't have to take responsibility at all, as long as every details is shared and everyone is on the same level of knowledge (e.g. telling people that you changed this and this and this to make it work, so they can see how you affected the system's workings).

For a production usage, you should consider using openmediavault/freenas/openfiller.

 

Maybe if I am in a good mood I will post my synoboot img used to install genuine pat files.

 

Those systems, while really nice, won't come near to Synology. Maybe when the big change with OMV 0.6 comes (new desktop-like UI as promised, maybe an actual OMV package manager to download ready-to-use system services e.g. e-mail, wordpress, etc., a la Synology, and also the revamped installer), then it will be mature enough to be used. But right now it is a one-man project, and while the guy does a really great job, it is going slow. So no, not ready for prime-time. FreeNAS is okay if you want to deal with BSD (something that I don't), and OpenFiler, well, I never liked it. It is more of a NAS-only OS. Synology is multifunctional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like many have been following this thread for some time eager to put 4.3 on my N54L.

 

I have to ask, as someone using 4.2 from https://drive.google.com/folderview?id= ... sp=sharing , I don't really mind missing out on any additional features, but is my device a security risk on the internet?

 

I assume 4.3 would have closed a few security holes and not just adding new features. Whilst my box is made up mostly of movies and music I'm still paranoid I pose a risk.

 

I wish I could find the tread to thank the developer of the DSM I'm running, it's amazing and I'm very grateful. Obviously in a perfect world upgrading would be grand but understand why no one wants to share

 

:smile:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the security issues with 4.2? I thought it was just enabling DoS security protection defeated all the firewall rules?

As long as you DID NOT enable. Main Menu > Control Panel > Firewall and QoS > Security > enable DoS protection

Your firewall rules should work fine.

That being said, of course you have your NAS behind a nice firewall like pfsense and you are only port forwarding the ports you want to get to xpenology. :grin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In fact my release works fine but I think I will keep it for me for several reasons :

 

blah blah...

 

We're here to sharing.

When someone don't want so seed, it's the time they should to leave...

 

Sorry for my bad English...

 

YES, out of here if you dont want to share.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dead? no. I'm running 4.3 files I provided with smallupdates applied. 20 users, 10TB of data, 5 IP cameras, Plex server, all works fine. It CAN be usable. But still waiting for VeNoM's release.

 

Can you share and tell how you applied your patches??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In fact my release works fine but I think I will keep it for me for several reasons :

and I have to disagree with you, on various points:

1/ syno put some verification so they don't want the dsm been installable on a cheaper system.

But that does not stop us, right? By the way, the term "cheaper systems" might not be correct - lets say, unauthorized systems.

2/ if it spread on the internet as a ready to use release, syno will certainly add more check in next release.

It is not that widespread. I'd bet my kidneys that only 5-10% of the DSM runners are actually on unofficial hardware. The largest clients of Synology are bigger companies covering simple server functions - they cannot just get a hacked release from the internet and run it. And those purchases are HIGH compared to the personal ones.

We have a small-ish electronics store in my town, and I have talked with the guys working there (they sell some barebone and ready-to-use NAS from ReadyNAS, WD, Synology, and some other brands). They said that the Synology sales outnumber the barebones sales about 1:5.

 

Besides, we are doing it for this kind of fun, aren't we? Hack it, then look out for Synology, see what they got to throw at us next time. Every release has a disclaimer that it might break, etc., so everyone uses it at their own responsibility. You can post your build, write some nice text that it is a one-time release, no updates, no fixes, etc., and nobody can have a word.

3/ all on this thread give enough information to create your own working system.

For you, maybe. But the number of technically savvy people on these boards is quite limited. Hell, even me, whom I consider quite experienced with IT, couldn't recreate your method :grin: (but that's mostly because I don't know how to C++). So yes, there are like, 5-6 guys who can recreate what you did, and that's it.

4/ I don't recommend dsm for kiddies as update could break the system

These people are not kiddies. They are tinkerers too, waiting to try the latest new stuff. We are aware that any update can break the system, delete our data, cause nuclear armageddon, blow the planet up, or eradicate the planet from time and space in every continuity, yes. That's why I wouldn't install it on a live system, but for playing around...

5/ the kernel modification need to be included if they update the kernel and I don't want to be the maintainer.

I'm pretty sure that if you gave a sound solution to base on, someone (looking at Trantor right now :mrgreen: ) would take it over and maintain it, patching it up to the latest.

6/ it's easy to create a Trojan horse release, with backdor in it, that's why I create my own release from scratch. As it's a borderline project, I suggest to only install code you can trust.

And that's why we have trusted releasers. I for one only installed releases from this forum, from people who actually cared to update their products. Plus I never store sensitive information on my NAS, it is only for movies, pictures, etc.

 

So to sum up its great if you are familiar with Linux and understood all of the things in this thread. Dsm check can be defeated for the moment. I take responsibility on my own hardware if it failed, I never support this release for others.

That's what disclaimers are for. You don't have to take responsibility at all, as long as every details is shared and everyone is on the same level of knowledge (e.g. telling people that you changed this and this and this to make it work, so they can see how you affected the system's workings).

For a production usage, you should consider using openmediavault/freenas/openfiller.

 

Maybe if I am in a good mood I will post my synoboot img used to install genuine pat files.

 

Those systems, while really nice, won't come near to Synology. Maybe when the big change with OMV 0.6 comes (new desktop-like UI as promised, maybe an actual OMV package manager to download ready-to-use system services e.g. e-mail, wordpress, etc., a la Synology, and also the revamped installer), then it will be mature enough to be used. But right now it is a one-man project, and while the guy does a really great job, it is going slow. So no, not ready for prime-time. FreeNAS is okay if you want to deal with BSD (something that I don't), and OpenFiler, well, I never liked it. It is more of a NAS-only OS. Synology is multifunctional.

 

I agree with you 100% not a kiddie or some amateur. however im not a freakin bill gates programmer to be f*cking around with coding. been in IT for over 13 years and one thing I am not is a damn programmer. I let them do their thing but realise that is not my niche. However with that being said I am and was savvy enough to get OSX running on basic pc hardware doing kexts and dsdt crap like that. even the average kiddy couldn't even fathom that. Like you said though we are tinkerers and im willing to bet my kidneys and my balls and the sack they are in that people running dsm is within 5% or less. this is not even close to the hackintosh project. but selfish people that are out there, and don't care in bothering with a project but have a solution imo disgust me. but whatever synology is releasing dsm 5 and all i have to say is hahaha you're fucked now you selfish bastards :grin: - sorry for the rant. but its aimed towards the progress of this dinosaur of a project.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I ran it on a vmware environment, i it looks like it is working.

Both disk are IDE

I don't know what to test, i created a volume, installed a package and rebooted the system.

Volume is still there

 

Maybe somebody can check what they did with this build, and use it for a build by trantor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I ran it on a vmware environment, i it looks like it is working.

Both disk are IDE

I don't know what to test, i created a volume, installed a package and rebooted the system.

Volume is still there

 

Maybe somebody can check what they did with this build, and use it for a build by trantor

 

Try the microupdate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I ran it on a vmware environment, i it looks like it is working.

Both disk are IDE

I don't know what to test, i created a volume, installed a package and rebooted the system.

Volume is still there

 

Maybe somebody can check what they did with this build, and use it for a build by trantor

 

Try the microupdate.

 

Update is not working, i tried it with the next code as well

sed 's/flashupdateDeb/flashupdateDeb1/' /autoupd@te.info > /autoupd@te.info1
mv /autoupd@te.info1 /autoupd@te.info

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's working with my kernel :smile:

After some analyse, they use k3dt fix (mount trick, devices, devices-append....)

So far all works fine, packages, reboot...

 

Autoupdate want to update to 4.3-3810 but of course it's doesn't work this way ^^

 

I will try to build test version of 4.3-3810 build with these fixes :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Trantor,

 

Thanks for your nice work. :smile: Will this Version support this Motherboard:

 

Zotac NM10-DTX WIFI (Zotac NM10-F-E) http://www.mini-tft.de/xtc-neu/media/pr ... 830266.pdf

• Intel® NM10 Express chipset

• Intel® Graphics Media Accelerator 3150 GPU

• Intel® AtomTM D525 (dual-core)

• Processor clock: 1.8 GHz

• Intel® HyperThreadingTM technology

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.