Meta: DSM7 package status #4524
Comments
|
@hgy59 Is there an overview of changes I need to make to get DSM7 compatibility for my package ( |
|
@Safihre I suggest to start with the Wiki DSM7.0-Beta For your package you may only need to change |
|
So how do we handle the permissions? |
|
Generally you don't. Since you don't have root. DSM will chown the folders for you (using the package name) if you need other folders they need to be given in the resource worker or the user has to add the package from the DSM settings (look for "internal users" category) to a folder. |
|
Can we maybe update |
|
Under the DSM 7 restrictions I don't have a clear idea how that would work. Not saying it's impossible but even if done it wouldn't be backwards compatible anyway. If you're willing to contribute sure. But once you read DSM Developer Guide 7 0 Beta in full I think you might reconsider. IMHO the work required (if it's even possible with the new restrictions) to make it work is not worth the time. I encourage you look at the transmission package. It allows only the user to choose a Shared Folder through the wizard. The reality is that the NAS now manages the permissions, and packages only get a few selected knobs to play with. The permissions are in the user hands through the file manager and control center as "internal user" (IHMO that's a good thing. So malicious software can't just upload random files to a remote server) |
|
Sabnzbd also has a wizard already, but I don't quite see from the Transmission example what needs to be changed about it to make it work. Is it something in the name of the variable? |
|
On DSM7.0, rabbitmq is failing to start due to incorrect service_postinst(). |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@publicarray Thanks for the wiki-page DSM-7.0-Beta. As we get closer to DSM 7.0, I wonder when we will rename this page (remove the beta). As all the existing links to this page will be broken by a rename, we might better start with a new wiki page for DSM 7. We could wait for such a page until DSM 7 (final or RC1) is released and document validated facts only. What would you prefer? |
|
I propose that relevant stuff in DSM-7.0-Beta is moved/copied to their respective wiki page (Permission Management, Generic Service Support etc.) and that we create a quick DSM7 upgrade guide or a quick dsm7 reference for developers (IMHO the detailed wikis tend to quite long, I think some stuff is repetitive and or It's hard to find a specific thing. It's good to have them tough especially for newcomers but a quick dot-point list like the DSM-7.0-beta is more digestible for a quick lookup, kinda like a cheat sheet. What do you think? |
|
To give an overview of packages that need additional data migration, I have added the column |
|
Maybe we should migrate the |
|
Maybe we should start to set |
|
@hgy59 perhaps something closer to That could be quite easy to add to my current PR such as seting from the Then in Lastly add to |
I prefer to test this with my local repo as we have to wait up to 48h for the repo on synocommunity.com until new packages appear in the package center in DSM. |
|
Unfortunatly this does not work with the current implementation of spkrepo and there is already an open issue SynoCommunity/spkrepo#63. |
|
@th0ma7 I do not understand what you mean by disabled. say we have only such versions of package in the repo:
Now you have devices with different DSM Versions installed
With the current spkrepo implementation all these devices will get the same version of package downloaded in the DSM package center
You cannot force to download package-6.2-24922 for DSM 6.2.2 when package-6.2-25556 is not compatible with DSM 6.2.2 due to different kernel version. |
|
@hgy59 from a spkrepo point of view, you are most probably right. I don't know if there is anything that can be done to add such field so it is understood somehow from the package center which would be quite useful. I am rather referring to the actual package, already installed/running on your DSM: I want to make sure that it becomes disabled (or removed) pre-post applying a DSM upgrade that affects the kernel. With this I assume that, lets say you are running DSM 6.2.3-25423 and using a compatible kernel package, it will stop working when you install DSM 6.2.4-25556 upgrade due to the |
|
Dear @hgy59 how can i install these packages (noarch) on my NAS with DSM 7.0? i do not find any source? thanks |
|
Ok, no problem, I'll wait. |
|
Is there an overview which packages are ready for DSM 7.1 ? I'm afraid my Setup beaks after updating to DSM 7.1. I'm running all SynoCLI, Python 3.10, zsh and git. Edit: I’ve successfully upgrade to 7.1 without any problems. |
|
are there any plans for gateone to work on DSM 7.1? |
So far there are only some issues due to restsricted permissions for /tmp folder. Since there where certain changes from DSM 6.0 to DSM 6.1 we dropped support for DSM 6.0 some years ago. As it looks your issues are not related to radarr/sonarr/lidarr ... (or other packages, /tmp permission related), please create new specific issues here. |
|
are there any plans for irssi on dsm 7?. o docker alternative with xdcc support? |
|
Updated statuses for |
|
Hi ! |
AFAIK theres an dependence on "Python" still built in GateOne. Wouldn,t it be sufficient to have Python 3 because Python won't install. |
|
As far as I know gateone should also be upgraded to a newer version to be able to use python 3. |
|
@scooterama in #5405 you find more information. Do not expect that gateone will ever run on DSM 7. |
|
Does anyone have info about Medusa compatibility? |
|
Yes I have I created a package for Medusa. |
Wow. Thank for your work. When ruTorrent is ready, I'll upgrade to DMS7 and test out your package. |
|
I use Download Station for torrents, works fine with Medusa. |
#2661 is very old, as it was created when DSM 6 was new and current was DSM 5.2 Those pages are a kind of migration status and not a common DSM x availability documentation. |
|
I'm not sure why Selfoss package is still being included in the repository when it hasn't been working since DSM4. |
Selfoss has been updated as part of #5916 |
|
Greetings! |
|
Hello everybody! Is it possible to contact someone with a request to build an asterisk package for SYNOLOGY DSM 6.2.4? |
and others
Overview of the status of packages for DSM7
Successfull build/install/run is tested with x64 only (unless otherwise stated).
As of may 2021 all pure CLI packages are ready to be published for DSM7. Please regard DSM7 packages still as
beta.The synocommunity package repository does not support beta packages per
TCVERSIONso it is not possible to mark packages as beta for DSM7 only.Packages that other packages depend on are distingueshed in bold. Those should be published as early as possible.
target/etc/ejabberd/target/var/lib/ejabberd/git-serverhassiojuppmono, chromaprint #5485nzbget-testingdependent packages should use python 2.7.18 of DSM7Remarks:
1) Avoid link and usage of
/usr/local/{package-name}2) Migrate mysql to
mariadb-103) Does not install due to required root privilege
4) Installer uses unsupported function like
set_unix_permissions, syno_remove_user, syno_group_create, syno_group_remove, syno_user_add_to_group, set_syno_permissions, syno_user_add_to_legacy_group5) Requires a dependent package that might not be published yet.
6)
SERVICE_WIZARD_SHAREis not supported for DSM7. Shared folders must be declared in resources and must be the name of the share (without volume).7) Packages that integrate into WebStation (web apps, web services) must register via WebStation webapi or use a Package Worker.
8)
target/varis not listed here, as migration is already implemented in current installer.9) Invalid version number. DSM7 validates
$(SPK_VERS)-$(SPK_REV)with regex[^\d+(\.\d+){0,5}(-\d+)?$]. So only digits and dots are allowed inSPK_VERS.10)
SERVICE_EXEneeds migration toSERVICE_COMMAND.11) As Python2 of DSM 7 comes neigther with
pipnorvirtualenvit looks like we have to deploy python2 for DSM 7 (at least for the single package ffsync that will never be ported to Python 3 as it is about to be migrated to Rust).⛔ Packages that require root privilege to run will not be compatible with DSM7.
⌛ Packages that need root previlege for installation will not be compatible until synology allows permission settings for specific installation steps.
⚙️ Packages that need access to USB devices. synology might drop support for USB devices.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: