stallemanden

When will upgrade be possible ? Installing 1.0.134, already having for instanse 1.0.99 installed leaves me with the rather odd behaviour, that I need to create all shared folders all over. On top of that, I find it problematic, that two versions can be installed at the same time. Currently have 1.0.99 and 1.0.134 installed side by side.

Once you have shared the secret with someone, you have given this someone access to your data. "Permission email" then would be the email in wich you send the secret.

I might be wrong, but to my knowledge, the WebUi is Linux-only ?

My best guess is, that you put it outside the last } ?

Are you remembering to do: ./btsync --config sync.conf It's not enough just to restart the deamon or run it as ./btsync

I would hate that the default was in this way, using btsync on NAS devices - I would not be able to gain access to it. And if you are already working with the config file - why not just set a user and password ? As mentioned, btsync works fine without having the --config option used, remembering the shares set up from start to start. So, for me when doing a first time run, prompting for user and password to be set, would be a great...no wait, awesome start.

Didn't check if this was suggested yet, but have a somewhat "interesting" use case, in which I see BTSync as a possible solution. I work in a company with 150 engineers. Our company is project based, meaning that all we do, is a result of our costumers having an requirement. It's everything from software development to mechanical desgin. Employees might be working on different projects at the same time. Projects that are not nessecary for the same costumer. As of right now, all data is stored on fileservers, in a structure , where one main folder for each costumer holds all current projects for this customer. My thought is, that imagining that we could set up btsync on our fileserver (or another server with internet and local access). Then having one shared secret for each employee, but the abillity to ad multiple folders to this one secret. So employees can add different folders, from different projects, to be synced to their laptops. This would of course also add the need for some sort fo AD interaction. Alternatively, the API could be used, and we could do our own application for it. So in short. • Multiple shared folders with very different locations, for one secret • AD interaction (or leave it up to API) btsync --add-folder [secret] [folder] If secret exists, folder is added to this secret.

Hi hdace, As mentioned, I also live in China. I can recognize that internet, especially out of China, works more or less as the wind blows. However, I have not managed to see any pattern for this. I've seen it a sunday morning as well as a wednesday afternoon, that it litteraly sucks. That being said, I must admit that I can not verify, that btsync is or has been influenzend in the way you mention. As I mentioned, I've seen no issues with the transfer in or out of China. Actually, I've see the most stable transfer rate once using the BT protocols - better then what I used to see in DK.

As I'm an Danish guy living and working in Beijing, China, SyncApp(BTSync) was a lifesaver for me. I have a NAS here in CN, and one in DK. I've tried with different ways of setting it up, so that the documents/files I use here in CN, partly on laptop but also on my NAS, would also be available in DK, without the anoying limitations caused by The Great FW of China. So, having set up BTSync on both my NAS devices, and on my laptops. No matter where I am - being DK og CN, I always have fast access to my files - without having to put my data in the hands of third party services. The delay there might be between DK an CN, copying files, is no longer an issue, as things gets in sync instantly.

Automatic Coding Nice - I had no idea that this could be the issue. Removed the cookies, and everything works like a charm. Thanks.

Hi, As an Danish living in Beijing, China and actively using SyncApp, I can report, that I have no issues what so ever. I have a NAS here in Beijing, syncing with a NAS in DK with no issues. Having two laptops, also having no problems connecting to both my NAS devices. My thought is, as Automatic Coding mentiones, that you have some sort of a NAT issue. Also, I can verify that torrents are working like a charm here in China.

First off - sorry for hijacking this thread, but the invalid request! is hauntung me I have SyncApp running on a Synology NAS. After getting it running, i jump to my beloved Chrome Browser, only to get a invalid request. Puzzeld about this, I start checking the config file I've made to see if there would be any errors. Comparing it to the config i have on a similar Synology NAS in another location, that works like a charm, I find that they are alike. So, I try throwing throwing the URL at IE, and boom - it works. The NAS where the gui works in Chrome is a DS710+ running DSM 4.2 The NAS where the gui does not work in Chrome is a DS712+ running DSM 4.2

It's not a bug, it's a question about the wording. If you should call it a bug, the bug would be that they wrote "...when Mac starts". SyncApp is user specific, and therefore syncs the shared folders of the user currently logged in. In order for it to work as you expect, SyncApp needs to run as a service, which is not yet possible, without doing some witchcraft

You made a special buid for Synology at some point. (Version: 1.0.99) Does a build for the latest version exist ? (Trying to do an update from the app in version 1.0.99 did not work - Windows)

I've not tried it, but I would guess you could copy the entire content of the folder to the new location. (Including all hidden files and folders). Then in SyncApp create a new share, to the new location, but with the key from the old location. I have not tested it

Could you give the solution ? Just so that other people that might come across this thread looking for this, can benefit from it.

I second that. Of course it could be nice to have the ability to ALSO sync the data to one of the many cloud services that exists, but I totally agree. If you want sync, but don't have the ability to have a computer/nas online at all times, and it's not enough for you to sync files when on the same network - SyncApp is not the right solution for you. I see SyncApp as a GREAT alternative to using different kinds of cloud storage, where your data is left entirely in the hands of some company with millions of users. I love the idea, that I control my data. I decide who has access and I decide what data is deleted or kept. It's no longer a matter of trusting some corporation with my data. I will always know where and what data I have. To sum up I wouldn't personally use the a feature to also sync data with a known cloud storage - If I wanted to do that, I would use that service instead.

Hi, From what I have learned, folders named .something (having the dot in the beginning) are treated as system folders and not synced. I am guessing that might be the issue.

I actually had a somewhat similar issue. Machine 1: Windows 8 Pro 64bit Machine 2: Windows 8 Pro 64bit Machine 3: Windows 8 Pro 64bit I started by sharing the entire projects folder for my VS2012 projects from Machine 1. I then added the folder to Machine 2, and everything seemed to be working like a charm. However, after everything was in sync between the two machines, a small set of files kept being synced back and forth, deleting them on the "host"/original machine (1) and adding them from Machine 2. Then the other way back. (At least that was how I interpreted the logs). This went on for days, so finally I decided to try manually to delete the files on Machine 1. The files then were synced back from Machine 2, and since then, no problems has been noticed.

My guess is, that windows will alarm you about the limited available space at some point, and hopefully at some point stop the writing. No need to get this upset. You are participating in a Alpha program, where I would think you would find it interesting to test for these situation.

I can see the great thought about a middle station so to speak, but I don't see why you would use a service like Dropbox for it ? Why not just use dropbox all together? What I find very interesting is, especially in my case, is the possibility to use for instance a NAS unit. My case is. I spend most of my time in China. Here I have a workstation and two laptops. However, I often do go back to Denmark, and transferring data quickly, which would be required, is a hazzle with the GreatFirewallOfChina and all. I do however have, here in China, a NAS device. So during my stay in China, my laptops of course always keeps in sync with that. In Denmark, I also have a NAS, so the plan is to setup syncapp on that one to. In that way, the two NAS units have the time to sync without me having to leave on my computer. Once I go to Denmark, I don't have to think about transferring any data - it's all in sync. Anyway, it's my hope it will work out as smooth as I expect I know that not everyone has the possibility to do this, but I don't think that SyncApp is the right solution, if you don't plan to have at least one of your units powered on at all times - to me, it makes no sense anyway. At least my thought about SyncApp is, that it's for users who want to avoid having data placed at a third party service, suchs as SkyDrive, Dropbox, Google Drive and whatnot.

Hi, I'm running SyncApp 1.0.75 on Windows 8 x64 I noticed an issue with the limitation of folder names. Trying to share a folder starting by a . (for instance .minecraft) will not work. SyncApp does not recognize the folder. No error is given, but the folder is not being indexed. Removing the folder from SyncApp and renaming it - removing the . and then adding it to SyncApp makes the indexing work like a charm.

I have been trying to get the SyncApp working on my Synology DS-712+, but as it seems to be a well known issue, this is running with a somewhat old version of GLIBC. Today i've been giving it a go at compiling version 2.4, but it seems to be not as easy as one could have hoped for. I will try to keep looking for a solution, undtil a upgraded ipkg package becomes available to support the CPU in the DS-712+