Search results

Oops! It turns out it is working. It has just saved all the files into one tree rather than two as I expected. Below you can see the output from the backup process -- I don't submit a backup command but have done everything through the GUI. INFO: starting new backup job: vzdump 105 --mode...

Hi, I'm using Proxmox as my development workstation, doing my development inside various LXC containers. These are configured with a small root disk to which I usually add a larger mount point mounted on /home for all my data -- the idea being I can copy these and/or attach these to new...

I managed to work around this. When the installer reported "No network interface device found", I switched to the shell on tty3 (Ctrl-Alt-F3) and removed the tg3 module from the running kernel using rmmod tg3 I then loaded the broadcom module followed by the tg3 module again: modprobe broadcom...

Can't such an app be distributed via the web-server instead of packaging it as a stand-alone app?

Was this ever resolved? Ubuntu 18.04 running fine on a Dell Vostro 460 with an on-board Broadcom BCM57788, but Proxmox 6.3-1 installer doesn't detect it -- even though it is listed in the output of lspci.

The computer you're trying to connect to it from is on the 192.168.100.0/24 network? (Just checking!)

I don't understand why you invest time and money into a standalone app just for Android when you could develop a better mobile device view which works in all mobile browsers. HTML5 and Javascript is really powerful these days.

OK But you can either: 1. Use a public domain and create internal names for that using Let's Encrypt. or 2. Setup your own CA and make your internal machines trust that CA. Personally I would use approach 1. Then automate using Let's Encryt. Domains are pretty cheap and your time costs money...

Now that Debian is available for Raspberry Pi and the hardware is available in a 64-bit version with 8Gb RAM, is it possible to provide an arm64 repository so we can add Proxmox to an existing Debian install on this platform?

Why can’t you use DNS domain verification?

If you have a valid SSL certificate you should leave the fingerprint field empty!

Hi, Recent versions of Proxmox VE have a built-in ACME client which works really well (we use DNS domain validation). Are you going to add this same support into PBS? I don't see it on the roadmap. If so, for installs where the PBS is installed to the same host OS install as PVE (ie...

No, it was the UWSGI app that wasn't responding. Apache was working fine. But there's no inherent limitation that makes it a bad idea for us to deploy our new webservers as containers rather than VMs?

Output of pct config: arch: amd64 cores: 4 hostname: fof1 memory: 1024 mp0: local-lvm:vm-114-disk-2,mp=/home,backup=1,size=1T net0: name=eth0,bridge=vmbr0,gw=192.168.100.1,hwaddr=42:6A:E2:C1:3C:FE,ip=192.168.100.231/24,type=veth onboot: 1 ostype: ubuntu protection: 1 rootfs...

I'm concerned about the limitations of LXC containers for production servers. Currently we run our main production servers (web, database, etc) as KVM virtual machines but were considering deploying them in containers in future. We have quite a few small applications running in containers and...

Thanks. That tells me all I need to know. I'm using Proxmox as my workstation OS, so udisks2 was installed by the act of adding XFCE to the install. Will disable the udisks2 service as I almost never use USB disks and have no plans to add storage to my desktop machine.

I'm having a problem that has been reported by other Debian and Ubuntu users that udisksd is using lots of CPU. Right now I'm investigating workarounds rather than solutions so my question is: Is this service essential to Proxmox? What happens if I stop and disable it?

Hi, What's the best way to upgrade from Proxmox 4.4 to something more current, probably 6.0? Our servers are basically default installs and are patched up-to-date. All of our VMs and containers are stored in LVM. We don't use ZFS. Our servers aren't clustered in any way. Thanks, Colin

Was this default already changed in 5.3? It seems to be at least, unless it's just my browser or session remembering some previously used options.

I debugged this by looking in /var/log/auth.log. The unsuccessful logins under Proxmox 4.4 looked like Feb 28 10:19:56 host1 login[19577]: pam_securetty(login:auth): access denied: tty '/dev/pts/0' is not secure ! Feb 28 10:19:59 host1 login[19577]: FAILED LOGIN (1) on '/dev/pts/0' FOR 'root'...