@thwr said in LTO tape library upgrade:

@penguinwrangler said in LTO tape library upgrade:

We are looking at going with LTO-8. The capacity and speed and the ability that it is offline and can be offsite extremely easy were all winners in our books. Offline meaning once the tape is in storage it is not on a network and can get hit by ransomware.

It's just a requirement for us. But yes, your points are valid. 12TB uncompressed per tape isn't that bad. I was looking for an upgrade because 1.5TB for LTO-5 isn't exactly what fits todays capacities.

We can't use cloud backup, hasn't been approved for us yet. So the capacity of the LTO-8 tapes is what we like.

@fateknollogee said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:

@tim_g said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:

This was on a MD1000, very old.

MD1000...old school! I know those units. I've got 2 of them in storage gathering dust!

I have 2x LSI 620J. I might just connect it with LSI 9207E HBA

If you don't mind the 3 gbps bus, the MD1000s are amazing.

@momurda said in WSUS preparation for Windows 10 Feature Upgrades:

Wow. Definitely not doing that if I have the same problems as you.
Ill just go around and install the upgrade manually.
Not even sure why MS still has WSUS, it is nothing but problems unless you spend hours a week fixing and maintaining it.

I hear ya, this took me an hour to research, make sure to gather correct logs and then do the how-tos.

@black3dynamite said in Snipe-IT php upgrade.php install:

@dustinb3403 said in Snipe-IT php upgrade.php install:

No denials found.

100% done found 0 alerts in /var/log/audit/audit.log

Is apache the owner of snipeit directory, subdirectories, and files?

apache : apache owns at least storage, which is where those files are. (I am a part of this group)

@jaredbusch said in Snipe-IT updating from 4.1.3 with new Laravel Requirement:

[root@assets ~]# cd /var/www/html/snipeit/ [root@assets snipeit]# git pull

Doh.. yeah my update script does this.

@tm1000 said in Trying the FreePBX 13 to 14 Upgrade:

@jaredbusch said in Trying the FreePBX 13 to 14 Upgrade:

The UCP is supposed to be improved, but it looks like more work instead. Need more time with that.

@bigbear said in Trying the FreePBX 13 to 14 Upgrade:

I gave the UCP a try, there was no default layout or apps. Kind of a miss there because by comparison it is maybe its stronger using-facing benefit.

@jaredbusch said in Trying the FreePBX 13 to 14 Upgrade:

That is what I am seeing and wondering WTF.

We have plans to add customization by Administrators from within User Manager. We will also note to add default layouts in there as well.

The tutorial walks you through most of this however.

More to come in time.

Yeah, a default layout would be awesome. The tutorial is good. I went through it yesterday.

For those looking to do this upgrade, the link is no longer valid. Try this one...

https://wiki.freepbx.org/display/PPS/Upgrading+from+FreePBX+10.13.66+to+SNG7

I have not upgraded any of my systems to 4 yet. Glad to see my supposition was correct.

Mainly at home, however, i do keep a virtual machine running at work with it installed. Some things I just prefer to do using Fedora. I find it much more flexible and I just like the software better in a lot of cases.

@stacksofplates said in Permission error attempting to update ownCloud to Nextcloud:

What's crazy to me is they haven't built SELinux operations into their update scripts.

Yes. And upgrade completed. Such a simple thing to check and tell people.

@JaredBusch said in Unifi AP refusing to upgrade:

@Dashrender said in Unifi AP refusing to upgrade:

@brianlittlejohn said in Unifi AP refusing to upgrade:

Did yall notice that the new update has the ability to export and import individual sites instead of the entire config?

didn't JB post about that a week or so ago?

Nope.

I must have just read it in a released then.

@dafyre said in UniFi controller will not start after upgrade to Ubuntu 16.04.01:

Win!

If I had realized that stable was not 5.0.X, I would have not changed to stable. Likely saving myself some steps.

Circling back to this, it is like I was blind or something. This happened because owncloud made it into the EPEL. It says it right there in my screenshot.

I just installed a new CentSO system and wanted to see what it tried now.

[root@bna-nc ~]# yum install owncloud Loaded plugins: fastestmirror epel/x86_64/metalink | 12 kB 00:00:00 epel | 4.3 kB 00:00:00 (1/3): epel/x86_64/group_gz | 170 kB 00:00:00 (2/3): epel/x86_64/updateinfo | 751 kB 00:00:00 (3/3): epel/x86_64/primary_db | 4.6 MB 00:00:00 Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile * base: centos.mirrors.tds.net * epel: mirror.oss.ou.edu * extras: ftpmirror.your.org * updates: bay.uchicago.edu Resolving Dependencies --> Running transaction check ---> Package owncloud.noarch 0:9.1.4-1.el7 will be installed

Very nice.

@scottalanmiller said in ownCloud 8.2.4 to 9.0.2 upgrade problem:

have you tested yet?

I have more systems that I can upgrade, but I have not done so yet.

@Breffni-Potter said:

@JaredBusch said:

I don't care if a company gets bought by another because it is a good product and successful.

Connectwise, Their main product seems to be getting more and more unhappy users as time goes on. Even on the marketing "MSP" sites. People do not like the product.

http://www.mspcomparison.com/home/917-psa/34-connectwise-msp.html

Now when something with such a bad image, buys a product you love, would you not be worried?

I do not call a few bad reviews a bad image. happy users do not post as many reviews as pissed off users. Also note the timestamps there.

Now, I will not argue and say they are good, because I do not know that. But i have not seen bad press regarding their services, is all I am saying.

@olivier said in Xen Orchestra Upgrading:

@DustinB3403 You need to think globally 😉 Only 1 Premium is enough to not have to convince 7x Starter. And costing 7 times less in support.

You should see Starter as "introductory offer". We'll add services step by step (like Cloud Backup).

Yeah, supporting the SMB's is the killer.

I think perhaps a better plan for SMBs would be, here's the product, some charge - say $500 (pulling a number out of my rear) and with that you get 4 hours of support. Then you can buy support in blocks after that.

The hard thing, you're going up against the likes of Veeam, and because of their size, they don't have to limit it like this.

And instability often leads to security vulnerabilities, they tend to go hand in hand.

@scottalanmiller said:

@brianlittlejohn said:

@scottalanmiller The only time I think I would consider using it would be if I had a remote office that had a metered connection (satellite) or very low bandwidth available.

Even then I would only do it exclusively in a company that sends a lot more email internally rather than externally and that would probably be a big company and that would likely mean that we just need to fix the Internet situation.

I was still talking about WSUS.

I would think it should be close enough - like you said,.. assuming it is like most companies.

I do have another fall back option.. just a matter of coordinations.. Former co-worker has the same laptop (it's his fault I bough this thing).. so push comes to the last line,..I might be able to get it from him.....

Maybe.