• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About 12345lamacun

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

313 profile views
  1. okay, thanks for your clarification and for providing a workaround! :-)
  2. @RomanZ: As described by @Gorn in the first Post, Sync does not work anymore on the Raspberry Pi 1, ARMv6 Processor, armhf Raspbian/Arch Linux. Gorn tried it under Arch Linux and installed BTSync via "AUR" (Package manager, I suppose?) and by manually downloading from home page. I tried to run it under Raspbian, but neither installing it via apt-get, nor running the downloaded Version from your Homepage (2.3.8) did work. Tried installation just now, Debian 8.0 (Raspbian), Kernel Version 4.4.13+, Default user "pi": sudo apt-get install btsync Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done The following NEW packages will be installed: btsync 0 upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded. Need to get 0 B/4506 kB of archives. After this operation, 6786 kB of additional disk space will be used. Selecting previously unselected package btsync. (Reading database ... 36585 files and directories currently installed.) Preparing to unpack .../btsync_2.3.8-1_armhf.deb ... Unpacking btsync (2.3.8-1) ... Processing triggers for systemd (215-17+deb8u4) ... Setting up btsync (2.3.8-1) ... Job for btsync.service failed. See 'systemctl status btsync.service' and 'journalctl -xn' for details. invoke-rc.d: initscript btsync, action "start" failed. dpkg: error processing package btsync (--configure): subprocess installed post-installation script returned error exit status 1 Processing triggers for systemd (215-17+deb8u4) ... Errors were encountered while processing: btsync E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) Output of "systemctl status btsync.service": :~ $ systemctl status btsync.service ‚óŹ btsync.service - BitTorrent Sync service Loaded: loaded (/lib/systemd/system/btsync.service; disabled) Active: failed (Result: start-limit) since Mon 2016-09-05 19:49:33 CEST; 2min 15s ago Docs: http://help.getsync.com/ Process: 4687 ExecStart=/usr/bin/btsync --config /etc/btsync/config.json (code=killed, signal=ILL) Process: 4684 ExecStartPre=/bin/chown -R btsync:btsync /var/run/btsync (code=exited, status=0/SUCCESS) Process: 4681 ExecStartPre=/bin/mkdir -p /var/run/btsync (code=exited, status=0/SUCCESS) Directly executing binary: :~ $ /usr/bin/btsync --help Illegal instruction :~ $ Starting Service via systemctl: :~ $ sudo systemctl start btsync Job for btsync.service failed. See 'systemctl status btsync.service' and 'journalctl -xn' for details. :~ $ sudo journalctl -xn //Contains no entry related to btsync-service AT ALL Had to downloaded binaries again, because I already deleted them, negative results as well: For armhf version: :~/btsync/BitTorrent-Sync_armhf $ ll total 6608 drwxr-xr-x 2 pi pi 4096 Sep 5 20:00 . drwxr-xr-x 4 pi pi 4096 Sep 5 20:00 .. -rw-r--r-- 1 pi pi 227 Jun 20 15:08 LICENSE.TXT -rw-r--r-- 1 pi pi 1607 Jun 20 15:08 README -rw-r--r-- 1 pi pi 6746820 Jun 20 15:10 btsync :~/btsync/BitTorrent-Sync_armhf $ chmod +x btsync :~/btsync/BitTorrent-Sync_armhf $ ./btsync Illegal instruction :~/btsync/BitTorrent-Sync_armhf $ Okay, this is some unexpected and strange result: The arm Version seems to be running just fine?! Just checked, I am even able to add folders via Webinterface... :~/btsync/BitTorrent-Sync_arm $ ./btsync --webui.listen By using this application, you agree to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use and End User License Agreement. https://www.getsync.com/legal/privacy https://www.getsync.com/legal/terms-of-use https://www.getsync.com/legal/eula Webui is listening on BitTorrent Sync forked to background. pid = 5048 :~/btsync/BitTorrent-Sync_arm $ Checking via "readelf -A /proc/self/exe | grep Tag_ABI_VFP_args" as described on https://blogs.oracle.com/jtc/entry/is_it_armhf_or_armel im running a armhf-System and should have used the armhf-binary? as you can see in the apt-get output it automatically selects the armhf-Version. I did some googling on architecture and arm/armhf, but those results made no sense to me at all or were not related to my situation... apt-get update selecting armhf packages: sudo apt-get update Hit http://linux-packages.getsync.com btsync InRelease Get:1 http://mirrordirector.raspbian.org jessie InRelease [14.9 kB] Get:2 http://archive.raspberrypi.org jessie InRelease [13.2 kB] Hit http://linux-packages.getsync.com btsync/non-free armhf Packages Get:3 http://mirrordirector.raspbian.org jessie/main armhf Packages [8981 kB] Ign http://linux-packages.getsync.com btsync/non-free Translation-en Get:4 http://archive.raspberrypi.org jessie/main armhf Packages [146 kB] Hit http://archive.raspberrypi.org jessie/ui armhf Packages Would be grateful for some clarification... Thanks in advance!
  3. @RomanZ Have you found a solution for running btsync on a ARMv6 armhf Raspberry Pi 1 so far? Or is there any other solution available for Raspbian? (I was not able to adapt the glibc downgrade instructions for Arch Linux to Raspbians apt system...)
  4. @iswrong, RomanZ: Thanks for your response! Made it a bit clearer to me ;-) @RomanZ: Will there be a higher CPU-load even if I store the folder encrypted only? (use case: Storing a folder encrypted-only on a RaspberryPi for redundancy and High-Availability) Thanks!
  5. Hey there, the "new" encrypted Folder-Feature seems to be a neat integration into the overall Concept and UI, at the same time it looks exactly like the Beta-Feature available via API. There were "1.4"-indicators next to Folders using the old "key"/"secret"-based system - which is gone now. Seems to me like you decided to not integrate encrypted folders into the new certificate-based-system and instead just made the old 1.4-feature available to everybody? Are there any disadvantages we need to consider when using this feature, compared to usual certificate-based-folders?
  6. Hey everbody, I am keeping a bit up-to-date with those various solutions regarding File-Syncing out there. I was looking into how to get Sync running on my RaspberryPi running OpenELEC, and stumbled accross the fact that alternative products offer a way easier way. Would it be possible to offer an OpenELEC OS-Addon for BitTorrent Sync (or an Kodi-Addon, just like the BitTorrent one) for user-friendly installation? The average Linux user should be able to install Sync on a Linux machine, but there are a lot of people out there new to the Penguin-World and not as eager to learn new stuff then we might be ;-)
  7. Is this working within Sync 2.0? Copying a beta version of the folders content to the second peer, add it as read-only, and it transferrs the new files and delete the ones i deleted on the owner-peer?
  8. Same Problem here, tried rebooting Android and Windows 8.1, but did not help. Excellent Internet Connection via WLAN at my University and via Mobile Network and SurfStick both did not work. I am going to try to connect this evening again^^ edit: Well yeah, today those two devices linked within a few seconds. As far as I know I did not change anything.
  9. => 1) You could simply save the Read&Write-Secret from your Laptop (Textfile, stored on your Synology). If your Laptop dies and you have bought a new one, you can simply add the Read&Write-Secret saved earlyer and your Synology starts syncing. The ReadOnly-Secret allows you to receive and spread the files - but just the unmodified ones. If you change some files on your Synology via eg FTP, they will not be synced. => 3) Your Laptop would detect no changes, so there is nothing to propagate to your Sinology. It would not even know your Laptop rescaned its HDD. => 4) The rescan-interval is independent from the "rescan-network" interval. I assume BTSync is told by the OperatingSystem it got connected to a LAN, and starts looking for other BTSync-Devices (-> Synology) so it would need no more than a few seconds after connecting (At least my Laptop does need only a few seconds). => 2) I would say so... => Somebody got some verified information?
  10. within "Peer list" I have a down arrow, a number of files, and some concrete "Files" (encrypted file names) for the Android-Device. On the Overview in the Progress-Column there is a Downarrow with "0% - a few seconds", but no activiti within the "Receving" or "Sending" Columns.
  11. Correct. Well, kind of. I added it within Android via a Read&Write QR-Code-Scan on my Laptop. Anyway, I just checked the RW-Secret on Android, and it is the same as on my Laptop, starting with "D*".
  12. Hello, I'd like to sync my Android-Pictures to my Laptop and an always-on-RaspberryPi. Following setup after creating Secrets via API: Laptop: ReadWrite Android: ReadWrite RasPi: EncryptedSecret For testing purposes I closed BTSync on my Laptop, and expected a transmission of pictures to my RasPi. But nothing happened. BTSync showed a connected Peer, even correctly displaying the amount of Data and the numbers of Files, but my Android-Phone just did not want to sync. I turned my Laptop on, and my Phone started syncing to my Laptop - which succesfully synced to the RaspberryPi. Turning my Laptop off after a while - sync from Android to RasPi wont continue. Adding the ReadWrite Secret to the RaspberryPi works like a charm - but other people have access to the attached storage as well, so I would like to store my pictures encrypted.... Any Ideas? Just Reinstalled BTSync without Backup/Restore, did not help. FYI: I'm encountering the "App crashes regulary error" (Already discussed in some other topics) as well, before the reinstallation just as afterwards, stopped crashing when attached to a power source [did not]. Thank you very much in advance Sincerely Dominik edit: after the reinstall BTSync on my RasPi does not receive the correct number of files anymore, on my Laptop it does. edit2: well, it does get the number of files after a while.... and even whilst crashing everytime, the backround-sync does work anyway
  13. Lightroom does not move files just as the Windows Explorer does. It does change some Metadata, so BTSync cant detect whether that are the same files or different ones => retransmit
  14. You can share the new "link" (difference: if you share it with your mother-in-law she is kind of guided through the installation of btsync) with somebody, have more control over the expiration date, if someone posts the link into your facebook-timeline you have the ability to denie the requests of those friends of yours you dont want to have your secret. after you permitted somebodys request, they have the secret and can use it like they created it. the "centralized server" is just a website, checking if the recipient has btsync already installed, and then forwards the secret to btsync.
  15. You can not create custom secrets anymore, also you can not just enter a made-up Secret into the "Enter-a-key"-Field.