Arch linux kernel 5.5 and zfs... ruining my nas plans?

got my hardware for my nas but the arch kernel 5.5 and the current zfs issue is hitting me hard now.

first of all i’m not a linux user and i’m kinda proud i got arch running.

i’m totally confused by arch linux why the “installer” works with inet but you have to install even a DHCP client but all of this was fixable and i’m nearly done and…

pacman -S zfs-linux
and it doesn’t want to because i don’t have linux=5.4.15.arch1-1
also look here: https://github.com/archzfs/archzfs/issues/328

this is to much for me i really have no clue what i’m doing now i installed the LTS kernel i have decently new hard and this is a NAS i don’t plan on touching it anymore after i’m done with the raid.

i don’t want to manipulate grub to boot a different much older kernel i don’t know how to get the 5.4.15 kernel for this key part.
i don’t know what i could break doing this.
i don’t even know where to get this kernel and i don’t want to start from scratch…

so what can it do?

hardware is a asrock b450 pro4
2x8 GB ECC kingston 2660
an 12 nm x1600 also called the AF
an old SLC sundisk 128 GB SDD
6x12 TB WD white
a bootable sata controller card (only the ssd is connected to it)
currently a 960 to get an image.

Are you sure you want to use Arch as an OS for your NAS?
I’m suspecting it requires too much maintenance for such a device?
It Is rolling, with constant updates to packages that might or might not need maintenance after an update.
Or just don’t update it once set up, and let it fall behind?

2 Likes

linux-lts needs zfs-linux-lts (and vice versa).
Uninstall zfs, install linux-lts, reboot into linux-lts install zfs-linux-lts

the plan was to get it running and i just ignore it until i hear about serious security issues.

the reason for arch was i wanted something up to date as minimalistic as possible so my AMD system has a better chance.

i don’t know how to boot into the LTS version it’s installed and i found the img but grub didn’t add it on it’s own when i recreated the grub.cfg.
but at least you give me the impression that this is a normal setup.

i don’t even know how the LTS version deals with zen processors or if it is to old.

i guess the best think for me would be getting 5.4.15 but again no clue how to do that.

Turns out that the latest -lts version is 5.4.something . And has a zfs version alongside.

uname -a should tell you what kernel you’re currently running - so if you’re running lts already you would notice/verify it there.

You mentioned using grub as a bootloader. Grub has a menu based system allowing you to pick between different kernels or execute arbitrary commands when connected to a computer with a display and keyboard. The menu system, as well as which kernel to load is configured via text files.

OOTH, I don’t remember exactly how to configure grub for an lts kernel on arch (I use syslinux) but it’s doable. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if someone wrote a guide by now.

Edit: @Huhn_Morehuhn see https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/GRUB/Tips_and_tricks#Multiple_entries

i’m pretty sure there is a guide for that my problem is this save to do a kernel is not an unimportant thing do the settings stay are there syntax difference which may break i don’t know samba.

i’m just leaving my comfort zone.

I like how you think in general. In practice samba and Linux are not developed by complete muppets - those two should work

@Huhn_Morehuhn From my experience “basic” stuff like handling SMB and such will be unaffected. So you can try anytime. Just install it alongside, test it and if you’re fine with it, use it and set it as default.

Also: LTS Kernels are Long-Term-Support for a reason. They are (almost always) considered the most stable and tested. So have no fear, try it. You can always go back. Linux is nice like that.

Having multiple kernels installed is always a good option since you can easily switch to a know working one, IF something happens - Yes, contrary to popular opinion, IF not WHEN is my experience with Arch. There should be a Chris Titus Tech video about this… Dunno which. Try those:


You seem to have little experience when it comes to stuff like this, which is totally fine. May I suggest grub customizer? It’s a GUI based solution to manage Grub menu and entries. Regarding switching kernels, I think there is also a package that gives you a GUI like in Manjaro. Currently have no “clean” Arch, only Manjaro so I can’t vouch for that.

EDIT: If you rather have step-by-step instructions for CLI, We can do that too.

If you want to ignore updates anyway then there is absolutely zero reasons to go with arch. Just use something that is actually meant to be used on a server, since that is what you’re building.
CentOS, Debian, hell even Ubuntu server would be fine.
I mean do what you gotta do, but there is no reason for arch in this usecase.

If you’re not using something ancient AMD will work just fine. Even Ryzen 1 worked pretty much out of the box, the only issues arised with the APUs coming out.

2 Likes

FreeBSD is a good option for an OS with up to date packages AND first class ZFS support.

4 Likes

i only have a couple of gigs for the OS and i don’t have an xserver and i don’t want one. i want to be absolutely up to date when i create the system and i want up to date fixes when something important comes up.
arch gave me all of this no bloated users for every application, no GUI, no freaking burn it down sudo stuff.

i have other stuff installed like nox version of qbittorrent i will use this to transfer from the old nas which is already ready to go to seed the old data and has it’s own tracker. just to make this absolutely clear this was far harder then installing arch…

when an important enterprise package like zfs breaks with a new kernel i don’t even want to imagine what else could break.

but i got you lts kernel is already installed i just have to figure out how to boot it and i should be totally fine.

my background comes from nas4free (it has a different name now) and i was told to get intel and broadcom stuff the rest is not supported properly or risky by freenas so i pretty much said to my self just go linux take something new there is no way the driver situation will be remotely the same.

and looks like i was right i was just unlucky with the timing.

what so ever i got what i wanted to know i can change a kernel and it should be fine and the last LTS kernel is very fresh too so i’m lucky i guess. i just have to later read through it change a couple of characters and i should be fine.

thank you i was more worried to touch this stuff and i don’t wanted to start again with an LTS arch install.

Who said anything about an X-Server? All the options I mentioned have headless options because… they are meant for servers.

Again, all the options have that because… they are for servers.

Care to explain? Running without sudo would mean running as root which… not a good idea.

Why. Do you like making your life hard? Why not just rsync, hell even copy paste…

You have that fear and run a rolling release because of that fear. What. You contradict yourself. That’s exactly why you run a server OS distro, because stuff gets tested before it’s pushed live or only gets bugfix/security releases to begin with.

Generally a rolling release is good if you want faster feature updates, but it’s at the risk of instability. Both things you say you don’t want, so why that choice. If you’re staying on LTS releases there is no benefit to a rolling release because it’s the exact opposite of its purpose.

Server oriented distros also generally come in a security-minded config that is fit for a server or NAS, on Arch you have to DIY all that yourself. That would be fine, but you also say you’re not very experienced in Linux soooo… :eyes:

Ok no need to fight. Everyone has their OS/distro they favor.

:bsd:

2 Likes

That’s fine, as I say do what he’s gotta do. I just wanna make sure he knows the possible downsides.

plz don’t take every line like it is written for you. i guess i have to get used to the different reply option this forum has so my mistake.

there is a reason for all of this. not saying they are always good reasons.

how old is sudo and how old is linux most of my linux experions comes from a time sudo was not a default feature a long time ago. i only consider to run a user for the qbit client and the smb share owner the same user yes the rest was done using root and i may just stick to root… life is to short. i understand the “risks”.

i can’t stop a copy paste operation in the middle of the operation. i can’t reboot the system and resume later.
there is a reason for that and there are alternative ways to do that obviously.
torrent has a way to check data integrity i can just recheck when the data has been transferred.
i can pause every time i want.
the problem with the qbittorrent nas4free setup was jails user rights and “stuff”.
on arch it was a little bit complicated for the daemon never did this before nas4free had a easier way to start a “command” after boot.
this doesn’t change that this is a very good question which i didn’t even hint to why i did it this way because it doesn’t matter with the real problem of bad timing.
it will stop and restart when both system are online fully on this own.
i don’t plan on running the system 24/7.
potential better speed mktorrent was able to create the torrents with over 300 mb sec melting the CPU using multi threading.
i used this to learn more about linux freebsd. with smb i’m lucky if i get 60 mb/s so ~120 mb/s is maybe possible now.
i get an nice over view in a web browser.
it sounds like fun and not to dumb risky.

can this be done easier if i have ask for it i’m absolutely sure i later got information of a torrent based transfer program that does similar things (i can’t remember integrity checking).

kernel is something i’m so unfamiliar with that i don’t want to touch it. software can be unisntalled and installed as i places but kernels i don’t have a clue.
do you really think i would have installed this arch linux version if would have known about this bug.
i didn’t even considered bugs like this to be typical on linux. the bug is in the stable linux kernel if any other linux destro has used this kernel i would have gotten the same issue no i’m lucky arch blocked the package else i wouldn’t notice after installing.
i still except this case to be an exception and not the rule on linux. and i will still expect stable releases to be properly tested.
my understanding of good tested stable releases does not change with this one hick up.

i was pretty much told that AMD is a huge risk because of bad drivers so is it really that dumb of me to take the newest stable not development release to hope for less driver issues?

i life with the impression that upgrading is fine and downgrading is not because a update adds new features or replace them so settings my be written differently and updating is a normal process so it is well tested while downgrading is different…

i’m getting the impression that’s just intel fan boy stuff now i heard. the driver situations seems to be totally fine on linux. is there really any reason to worry if a amd sata controller is corrupting data?

i did a lot of things wrong i could have checked for LTS kernels i didn’t even know they exist i know about LTS linux distros but that’s it.

yes i can not say i have a lot of knowledge about linux i’m a novice but i’m quite good with windows i would have never even think that i would miss the windows cli. so that’s doesn’t mean i’m useless on linux they are not that fundamentally different. general PC knowledge still applys.

Just one more reason to go with a server distro…

But that is exactly the issue I am trying to tell you with (bleeding edge) Rolling Releases like Arch. Packages do not necessarily get tested before they are pushed to the public repo. Blocking a package is not the norm on Arch, often the updates just get pushed to the repo and the user deals with the updates.
That is exactly why server oriented Distros are a thing.

No, it’s not stupid, and that’s not what I said either.
But AMD issues were a thing when the CPUs released, which is 3 years past at this point.

Depends on the package, most times downgrades work just fine. Breaking changes are only done on major versions (provided versioning is done properly in the package). But, that’s also just one more thing with Rolling Distros. You could end up with an untested update that does just that, and then you’ll have to figure out how to roll back. Server Distros typically don’t update to major versions so will only get bug fix and security updates.

Well, it’s bad if you care about the data :stuck_out_tongue: that being said that can happen with any controller and has nothing to do with AMD. Noone even said anything regarding Intel vs AMD :thinking:

Sure you can do everything yourself, didn’t say you couldn’t. But why go through the trouble if you could just get a distro with security in mind in the first place (and then tuning it to your needs ofc).


In the end, as I said: Do what you gotta do, I just don’t see the point in Arch in this use case.

don’t waste your time but here to give you an idea under what background i’m here:

The main issue I see with realtek nics is that the silicon locks up (presenting as watchdog timeouts, loss of the network connection) under sustained load. I have not seen a crash, and there is no risk of data corruption. Most home users will never notice a problem in typical usage.

If you aren’t satisfied by FreeNAS holding your hand, go ahead and use plain FreeBSD. That’s what I use at home and it has been solid with ZFS on AMD systems using realtek nics and the AMD sata controllers. Is it a setup that should be trusted in production for critical business functions? No, it’s a bunch of consumer hardware that simply is not built to the same standard of quality that servers used by hundreds or thousands of users at a time require. Is it fine for someone at home storing a few movies and music and pictures? Sure.

1 Like

I don’t see anything in that thread that would explain why Arch of all things for a NAS, but you do you :woman_shrugging: .

Since you’re looking at an R3 1200 everything I said above applies to everything with a Kernel of the last 4 years or so.

no not arch but intel vs amd why i thinked i needed the newest stuff even for an zen 1 CPU. i come up with arch on my own.

the hardware is already here you can see it in the first post the r3 was not available same for the x370 board.
and yes i couldn’t get headless working yet welp.
the board chipset is not even 2 years old and that needs the most driver not the cpu. doesn’t matter just comes from the freenas story and the supposed to be bad driver support (get intel).
i just don’t want something that is for me bloated like nas4free or freenas with so much stuff i don’t need i wanted something that is as minimal as possible to use as little ram as possible and as modern as possible. arch was the first thing i found that gave me all this. and it had tutorials for ZFS.

i got your points now that stable is not the stable i understand as a windows user.

my old nas is AMD with realtec nic and it worked fine and it was pretty much said i’m kinda “lucky” “i would be scared if i would be you” and such stuff
i even think about getting the i3 with intel nic into the system to copy the data from it after reading that…

pretty sure my torrent setup will make corruption impossible anyway.

the system was a cheap try to get above pure consumer grade hardware by getting ECC into the system.