Recommended Posts

Hello,

This would be great for BitTorrent Sync to be packaged as a Synology Package (SPK) so that users can install it.

I am the main maintainer of a cross-compilation framework dedicated to create SPKs: spksrc

I've created myself (and some contributors) quite a few packages already but I won't be able to create one for BitTorrent Sync because it isn't open source, which I deeply regret.

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure the team will make it available soon, since BTSync will be one of the main reasons people buy (Synology) NAS. just like me :)

What? I'm still confused why anyone would buy a nas that holds two hard-drives, has a terrible CPU, about 1GB of ram and costs $700.

For pretty much the same cost you can get a pretty decent computer holding >= 10 slots, probably more if you shop around and wait for items to go on sale before buying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What? I'm still confused why anyone would buy a nas that holds two hard-drives, has a terrible CPU, about 1GB of ram and costs $700.

For pretty much the same cost you can get a pretty decent computer holding >= 10 slots, probably more if you shop around and wait for items to go on sale before buying.

I'm not installing them at my place, they are for a friend who has no experience with NAS and still wants to manage them (as he says) so i don't want to keep on going back and forth each time he wants to do something, he can just call support or read an easy manual instead. and money is not an issue, not for me nor for my friend but he wants something that doesn't take too much space and wires.

as i told you when i sent you a PM and asked for what is your hardware, I'm Getting something like what you have, and setting it up my self.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What? I'm still confused why anyone would buy a nas that holds two hard-drives, has a terrible CPU, about 1GB of ram and costs $700.

The DS212j only costs $200 without the drives. I actually downgraded from a massive fileserver like you seem to be implying, that had 8 750GB hard drives (largest size at the time) in a hardware RAID controller with an i5 CPU, 4GB ECC RAM, etc. because it was way overkill (you don't need much CPU or RAM to run a file server) and used way too much power. The Synology NAS is already low power but it will go into sleep mode when there's no network access, which was important for me. Being able to do RAID-1 was also important. These two features alone would be very hard to implement with something like a Raspberry Pi... I'd love to hear how you could do it all for under $200 (others have already tried).

Also, the NAS has busybox already installed so you can SSH in and manually write daemons or whatever, but people already have created Synology packages for most services you can think of so it's very convenient (for me, Crashplan).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
because it was way overkill (you don't need much CPU or RAM to run a file server)

For a file server with the stock operating system that you want to run? I agree. However, apparently others think that their 1GB of ram is going to give them access to BTSync with TBs upon TBs of data, plex, transmission, sabnzbd and all the other high resource requiring network based applications.

I'd love to hear how you could do it all for under $200 (others have already tried).

Never said I could, I referred to $700.

Also, the NAS has busybox already installed so you can SSH in and manually write daemons or whatever, but people already have created Synology packages for most services you can think of so it's very convenient (for me, Crashplan).

And, as the majority of forums I visit have proven, the majority (Or, at-least the majority of the people who are complaining, which, is bias towards to people who have issues, so, I'll give you that) of people have had issues with said applications due to the lack of power that the devices provide.

Each to their own I guess, I'd rather to have more drive space, more power, more flexibility at the cost of ~ $500 extra (Although, amazon claims that they're $650 for a 2 drive set up, although, so you state, apparently they come with drives) & the extras in power, however, if you're purely using it for ~ 6TB or less and only want it to run the nessesities of programs (OS, SAMBA, RAID) then I can see where you're coming from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never said I could, I referred to $700.

And, as the majority of forums I visit have proven, the majority (Or, at-least the majority of the people who are complaining, which, is bias towards to people who have issues, so, I'll give you that) of people have had issues with said applications due to the lack of power that the devices provide.

Each to their own I guess, I'd rather to have more drive space, more power, more flexibility at the cost of ~ $500 extra (Although, amazon claims that they're $650 for a 2 drive set up, although, so you state, apparently they come with drives) & the extras in power, however, if you're purely using it for ~ 6TB or less and only want it to run the nessesities of programs (OS, SAMBA, RAID) then I can see where you're coming from.

Ah, now I understand. Yeah I totally agree, my low-end Synology NAS would not be a good choice if you need massive storage, consistently high throughput, tons of services/daemons running all the time etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have installed this package and I see it in the control panel however when I click the icon a new tab launches but it timesout and is empty. Anyone know where I could look to try and debug?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have installed this package and I see it in the control panel however when I click the icon a new tab launches but it timesout and is empty. Anyone know where I could look to try and debug?

It doesn't work for me if I try open the page from external IP /domain (e.g. my.nas.com:8888) but it opens if I use WLAN IP 192.168.0.34:8888

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm running BT Sync v 1.0.134 on my Synology DiskStation 412+ (DSM 4.2) and BTSync on 1.1.27 on 2 laptops.

I installed BT Sync on Synology NAS from http://packages.synocommunity.com. This source provides v.1.0.134 only.

I guess the different versions is the cause that BT Sync on Synology (1.0.134) and BT Sync (1.1.27) on the laptops fail to sync their folders.

The two laptops sync the shared folders between one another.

Any ideas?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello all,

Same issue here, my client on Mac OS checked updates automatically, and I clicked yes to install the update to switch to the latest 1.1.27, but then the sync wouldn't work anymore because my NAS has a client with revision 1.0.134...

Now I'm stuck to wait for synology to provide packet with 1.1.27.

Or is there a link to the previous versions of the btsync clients? That would be perfect!

And of course in the future I will make sure my NAS updates before updating my clients.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's frustrating that after early adoption over at SynoCommunity, it's been stuck at the 1.0 release for so long. Anyone know who's maintaining the package over there?

Anyhow, this thread: http://forum.bittorrent.com/topic/21406-how-to-update-btsync-from-10134-to-1127-on-synology/page__hl__synocommunity has not-too-difficult instructions on upgrading btsync on a synology (the package manager won't update the version number, but the sync app will sync!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

 

does a Synology NAS (running btsync 1.2.82) spin down the drive(s) after a certain period of inactivity especially if only RO-Secrets are used?

 

Is there an option (Synology or btsync) to only spin the drives up again, if there are incoming changes from remote?

 

Regards,

tomsam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just installed 1.3-106.2 on my Synology DS414 as a package from http://www.synocommunity.com and found that if kept on writing messages to /var/log/messages every few seconds. The messages looked like this:

 

Jul 22 13:12:59 DS414 entry.cgi_SYNO.Core.Security.Firewall.Rules.Serv[1].policy_check[3243]: service_conf_ports_get.c:185 protocol format error (tcp,3838/udp)! It should be "tcp" or "udp" or "tcp,udp", synoerr=[0x0D00 service_conf_ports_get.c:184]
Jul 22 13:12:59 DS414 entry.cgi_SYNO.Core.Security.Firewall.Rules.Serv[1].policy_check[3243]: service_conf_section_get.c:394 Service get port error, filepath: /usr/local/etc/services.d/btsync.sc, section name: btsync, target: dstPort, synoerr=[0x0D00 service_conf_ports_get.c:184]
Jul 22 13:12:59 DS414 entry.cgi_SYNO.Core.Security.Firewall.Rules.Serv[1].policy_check[3243]: service_conf_get.c:188 Get service section fail. (file: /usr/local/etc/services.d/btsync.sc), synoerr=[0x0D00 service_conf_ports_get.c:184]

 

I checked /usr/local/etc/services.d/btsync.sc and the syntax seemed correct to me. Even though it looked correct, I decided to change the file and remove the reference to the tcp port:

 

[btsync]
title="BitTorrent Sync"
desc="BitTorrent Sync"
port_forward="yes"
dst.ports="3838/udp"

 

After the change, the messages in /var/log/messages were no longer written, and the webui on port 8888 could still be used. I know that many people have issues with BTSync keeping their NAS from going to sleep. Could it be this was the issue?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not an expert with the meaning of log entries, but in my DS213+'s log, I don't see nearly that frequent an occurrence of lines that include the "SYNO.core" string. Sometimes minutes apart, often hours. Also, all mine say:

 

entry.cgi_SYNO.Core.Upgrade.Server[1].check[11630]: smallupdate.cpp:413 small fix can't downgrade, org_version[2], new_version[2]

 

I have no file /usr/local/etc/services.d/btsync.sc

 

I've never worried about sleeping, particularly because I have enough disk-related stuff going on 24/7 that I suspect my NAS will never sleep in any case, and that's just the cost of doing business. As discussed in other threads, my btsync process uses 13% CPU during the time between syncs. It would be nice to know why it costs so much CPU, but the devs have said they will be addressing this issue for the next version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have issues with both versions 1.4.83-8 (updated automatically from 1.3.109-3 which was installed manually).

 

In both cases when I want to add a folder, I want to point to /volume1/homes/userxxx/BTsync, however when in homes I can't navigate any further. When manually typing the path, I am told I "Don't have permissions to write to selected folder"

 

It seems the BTsync app doesn't have the sufficient rights to write or access in homes.

 

Any ideas???

 

Cheers,  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to point to /volume1/homes/userxxx/BTsync, however when in homes I can't navigate any further. When manually typing the path, I am told I "Don't have permissions to write to selected folder"

 

It seems the BTsync app doesn't have the sufficient rights to write or access in homes.

Can you ssh into your NAS and recursively change permissions to the btsync user's directory to 755? or try 777, if necessary, just to see if it works?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hi jimmy

 

just went in and checked my /volume1/homes/user1/BTsync folder

 

seems that BTsync is already 777:  

drwxrwxrwx    2 superfly users         4096 Sep 30 09:16 BTsync

 

but still doesn't work

 

When I paste /volume1/homes/user1/BTsync to add a new folder I have the "Don't have permissions to write to selected folder" error

 

However when I add a shared folder and use the default location it works :

/usr/local/btsync/var/BTsync

 

drwxr-sr-x    3 btsync   root          4096 Oct  8 02:19 BTsync

 

Obviously BTsync is coded to work on a folder that has quite different rights.

 

What's bugging me is if I use the default path then I can't access my sync'd files from the web UI and the FileStation

 

It would be so much better if I could select a user location instead of /usr/local/btsync/var/BTsync

 

Any thoughts?

Edited by superfly75

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hi jimmy

 

just went in and checked my /volume1/homes/user1/BTsync folder

 

seems that BTsync is already 777:  

drwxrwxrwx    2 superfly users         4096 Sep 30 09:16 BTsync

 

but still doesn't work

 

When I paste /volume1/homes/user1/BTsync to add a new folder I have the "Don't have permissions to write to selected folder" error

 

However when I add a shared folder...

I've created all my btsync directories as shared folders using Synology's File Station webui. So they're all of the form "/volume1/MyBtsyncDirectory." I vaguely remember running into the same problem you're having when I first started, but it's not in my notes. Since creating new File Station shared folders for each btsync directory has worked, I've just been doing that. I see that the permissions on File Station's shared folders are all 777, and apparently everything under them is 755 (directories) or 644 (files). I don't see any reason to mess with that because access is controlled via the Disk Station's "Users" utility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you have problems with the rights of the btsync user you can use this little tutorial to make the btsync user visible in the DSM, where you can comfortably give him rights for specific folders: http://forum.bittorrent.com/topic/32021-show-btsync-user-in-dsm-synology/

Nice guide. It's for those who have installed btsync via a community package. If you've manually installed btsync, then the btsync user you created will already appear in the DSM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.