user_proc.cgi: line 30: syntax error: unterminated quoted string - RC6 on DNS323-B1 and DNS325A1

[Gabriele Desinano]

Hi

I receive the same error on the two box that I upgraded to RC6 snapshot.

So it is impossible for me have any user boot settings

My sistem disk is an USB key for all my NAS


Before trying to upgrade other two DNS325 and an DNS323-C1 I would like to have any suggestion about this trouble

thanks in advance

[João Cardoso]

Thanks, I can reproduce that.

To fix you have to resort to the command line.

Start downloading by any means (ssh, ftp, samba...) the attached user_proc-00.patch to the box to any folder, e.g. /tmp

as the 'root' user execute the following commands and, assuming that you have Alt-F packages already installed:

if ! aufs.sh -s >/dev/null; then
  echo "Install one Alt-F package first, Packages->Alt-F"

  exit 1
fi

aufs.sh -n
mkdir -p /Alt-F/usr/www/cgi-bin
aufs.sh -r
patch -p0 < /tmp/user_proc-00.patch

The fixed file will be saved on the same device where Alt-F packages are installed and will automatically be used, there is no need to apply the patch again.

When testing your DNS-323-rev-C1, if it is using RC5 unapply first the fix for the fan/temp issue and report back the fan/temp/leds/buttons behaviour.

Thanks.

[gabriele desinano su gmail]

Hi Joao,

Thanks for your help

First of all I've to ask sorry to you because I have only DNS323-B1 and A1.  I confused B1 to C1 them: sorry.

ABOUT THE PATCH:

 I tried to share it whit google drive sharing and wget it into my nas but it copied bad things so I tried to modify direclty the line number 30 of the "user_proc.gci" file and it worked directly.

Hoe mutch important are the commands that you suggested to me before applying the patch? Are they intended to inform the sofftware about the new file version?

 Do you think there will be troubles if I haven't used them and modified directly only the file?

All seems to work fine but not the trensfer rate.  Is correct if I remove ethtool  and samba 3.5.11 packages?

In one DNS325 I had a better performance from 36 to 39 Mb/s and 41 Mb/s with SAMBA2  I used every test the same 3GB file (WIN7 64bit)

On  the second DNS325 I lost performance from 28 to 18Mb/s and 20 Mb/s with SAMBA2 I used every time the same 4,4GB file (WIN7 64bit)

On the third DNS325 I lost performance or not from 18Mb/s to 17/18 Mb/s THE SAME WITH OR WITHOUT SAMBA2 I used every time the same 3,4GB file (WIN7 64bit)

On one DNS323-B1 I lost performance from RC5 9,3 MB/s to RC6 8,8 MB/s, increased tu 11MB/s with SAMBA2 I used every time the same 2,7GB file (WIN7 64bit)

One DNS323-B1 has RC4.1

One DNS323-B1 Can see condivision onto the network  but may be that I have problems with  the OS and I'll reinstall it on these weeks. (WIN7 64bit another home)

I have to test also 2 DNS323-A1 and others 2 DNS323-B1

gabriele

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Alt-F" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/alt-f/irB51Q01Yvs/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to alt-f+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/alt-f.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[João Cardoso]

On Monday, 6 March 2017 18:27:15 UTC, Gabriele Desinano wrote:

Hi Joao,

Thanks for your help

First of all I've to ask sorry to you because I have only DNS323-B1 and A1.  I confused B1 to C1 them: sorry.

ABOUT THE PATCH:

 I tried to share it whit google drive sharing and wget it into my nas but it copied bad things so I tried to modify direclty the line number 30 of the "user_proc.gci" file and it worked directly.

Yes, but changes are on (volatile) memory, not on disk, so after the next reboot you will have to change it again.

Hoe mutch important are the commands that you suggested to me before applying the patch? Are they intended to inform the sofftware about the new file version?

 Do you think there will be troubles if I haven't used them and modified directly only the file?

The patch itself only fix the file, the important are the aufs.sh and mkdir lines, that creates the file parent directory on disk, under the Alt-F dir, so changes to file will be on disk. Read the "Customize firmware" wiki.

I will copy and reply to the next question under the announce topic

 

All seems to work fine but not the trensfer rate.  Is correct if I remove ethtool  and samba 3.5.11 packages?

In one DNS325 I had a better performance from 36 to 39 Mb/s and 41 Mb/s with SAMBA2  I used every test the same 3GB file (WIN7 64bit)

On  the second DNS325 I lost performance from 28 to 18Mb/s and 20 Mb/s with SAMBA2 I used every time the same 4,4GB file (WIN7 64bit)

On the third DNS325 I lost performance or not from 18Mb/s to 17/18 Mb/s THE SAME WITH OR WITHOUT SAMBA2 I used every time the same 3,4GB file (WIN7 64bit)

On one DNS323-B1 I lost performance from RC5 9,3 MB/s to RC6 8,8 MB/s, increased tu 11MB/s with SAMBA2 I used every time the same 2,7GB file (WIN7 64bit)

One DNS323-B1 has RC4.1

One DNS323-B1 Can see condivision onto the network  but may be that I have problems with  the OS and I'll reinstall it on these weeks. (WIN7 64bit another home)

I have to test also 2 DNS323-A1 and others 2 DNS323-B1

gabriele

[gabriele desinano su gmail]

                   You:   Yes, but changes are on (volatile) memory, not on disk, so after the next reboot you will have to change it again.

Hi, it seems that there is something wrong in the Hardware revisions:

I haven't had the need to apply the patch as you described: I try to explain myself as better as I can

I  applyed the upgrade until now upon 7 NAs:

2x DNS323-B1 all two from lan

      From LAN, the patch persisted just editing the user_proc.cgi file in /usr/www/cgi-bin directory . ANYWAY I later APPLYED the patch in your way to be sure as you raccomanded

3x DNS325-A1 from lan

     On two of them the patch persisted just editing the user_proc.cgi file in /usr/www/cgi-bin directory . ANYWAY I later APPLYED the patch in your way to be sure as you raccomanded

     on the third one the patch didn't persist just editing the the user_proc.cgi file in /usr/www/cgi-bin directory so I had to apply the patch as you raccomanded and I could FIX the bug


2x DNS323-A1 from remote

     On all two the patch DIDN'Tt work in the way you raccomanded:
              -  in a case, your way wrote permanently the /Alt-F/usr/www/cgi-bin/user_proc.cgi file but it DIDN'T FIX the bug, then I manually applied the modify on the /usr/www/cgi-bin/user_proc.cgi file and then it was FIXED also after a reboot (not power off because it is from remote);
              - the other case the patch DIDN'T work and it couldn't modify any  user_proc.cgi  as for the /Alt-F/usr/...file so for the /usr/..file.  Then I tried editing directly the /usr/www/cgi-bin/user_proc.cgi file without edithing  the /Alt-F/-... one  and the FIX worked. I couldn't try the power off because the remote position so I tried only the reboot, I think it isn't the same....anyway the modyfy persisted and the FIX works. Later  I modified also the /Alt-F/.../.../user_conf.cgi file to complete the work.

I hope to not have done confusion, but I something doesn't work well.

In addition I have to say that all the NAS have the system onto a usb key, and the ALt-F packages too.

gabriele desinano

[João Cardoso]

On Tuesday, 7 March 2017 11:05:30 UTC, Gabriele Desinano wrote:

                   You:   Yes, but changes are on (volatile) memory, not on disk, so after the next reboot you will have to change it again.

For a file from the firmware to be changed and the changes persist over a reboot, the change has to be done on disk.

Alt-F uses 'aufs' for that, and aufs does COW (Copy On Write). But the parent directory of the file in change must exists first.

So, in order to make changes to /usr/www/cgi-bin/whatever, the folder /usr/www/cgi-bin/ must exists under the Alt-F folder on disk as /Alt-F/usr/www/cgi-bin/. But nothing under the Alt-F dir should be touched without protection (the aufs.sh command)

The patch itself just changes the file under change, /usr/www/cgi-bin/whatever.

So I can't reproduce your results. My results:

[root@DNS-327L]# ls -l /Alt-F/usr/www/cgi-bin/user_proc.cgi

ls: /Alt-F/usr/www/cgi-bin/user_proc.cgi: No such file or directory

[root@DNS-327L]# ls -l /Alt-F/usr/www/cgi-bin/

ls: /Alt-F/usr/www/cgi-bin: No such file or directory

[root@DNS-327L]# ls -l /Alt-F/usr/www

ls: /Alt-F/usr/www: No such file or directory

[root@DNS-327L]# aufs.sh -n

[root@DNS-327L]# mkdir -p /Alt-F/usr/www/cgi-bin

[root@DNS-327L]# aufs.sh -r

[root@DNS-327L]# patch -p0 < /tmp/user_proc-00.patch

patching file /usr/www/cgi-bin/user_proc.cgi

[root@DNS-327L]# ls -l /Alt-F/usr/www/cgi-bin/user_proc.cgi

-rwxr-xr-x    1 root     root           642 Mar  7 19:59 /Alt-F/usr/www/cgi-bin/user_proc

[root@DNS-327L]# ls -ld /Alt-F

lrwxrwxrwx    1 root     root            15 Mar  5 15:38 /Alt-F -> /mnt/sda2/Alt-F

[root@DNS-327L]# ls -l /mnt/sda2/Alt-F/usr/www/cgi-bin/

total 4

-rwxr-xr-x    1 root     root           642 Mar  7 19:59 user_proc.cgi