synology issue installpkg not same owner

#Synology issue installpkg not same owner install#
#Synology issue installpkg not same owner update#
#Synology issue installpkg not same owner manual#
#Synology issue installpkg not same owner password#

If they wish to do GUI, they can probably set Duplicati up via /etc/default/duplicati to pass options People who are good at CLI might also use Duplicati CLI tools, and not ever use the web interface. Note that you're also not using encryption on the web interface unless you set up certificate for it. Headless Linux server users are probably pretty adept at ssh+CLI, What differs is that a Duplicati user is typically on Windows, Linux, or Mac, and may be on-system. An office situation might also have a password. Remote use in a home might go with open access. You protect it as you see the need for that.

I currently lack an understanding of how close Duplicati usage follows this model

#Synology issue installpkg not same owner manual#

Yes, Please see previously cited and linked manual sections about Settings and ,

#Synology issue installpkg not same owner password#

Did you look at forum pictures?ĭoes Duplicati offer password protection for the web interface? I think It now has a native package that DSM 7 Beta won't install.

#Synology issue installpkg not same owner install#

If not for it, you could probably install Duplicati as usual, and (if needed) have it use own interface. That's why I suggested that, however DSM 7 Beta put many of its package installs into question. It would be most suitable as point to run a few commands that might provision a web interface Note that the directions you have cited would not work in the present case, due to the problems that prompted opening this issue. Does Duplicati offer password protection for the web interface? I currently lack an understanding of how close Duplicati usage follows this model, or how closely it is able to follow this model if desired. Generally, Synology devices operate from the assumption that access is always remote, usually from within a firewall, but also that some users on the network may be not trusted, such that access should be available only through passwords. With a native DSM package, access would be integrated directly into the DSM interface, which has no command line. In the case of a Docker applications that was just installed in a new container, DSM provides a basic method for commmand-line access, but because of how cumbersome it is, it would be most suitable as point to run a few commands that might provision a web interface to serve as a portal for comprehensive management of the application. What I can say is that Synology systems are built as appliances, and are essentially unfriendly to command-line access, or to any direct user control over basic plumbing. Keeping things somewhat separated has pros and cons, but containers may be a workaround if nobody can fix install.īased on how some of the comments above are structured, I am having a few problems understanding certain parts of your explanations. Debugging and log access might be harder. I suspect a Docker container is a higher resource load, and some small or old systems might dislike lots of containers.Ĭontainers also have limited commands, and are isolated from their host.

#Synology issue installpkg not same owner update#

Perhaps you don't want the Duplicati autoupdater to update Duplicati within the container either, but it might be OK. One thing that the instructions call for is mapping persistent data to the host so it's not lost when container updates. One of the main Duplicati forum support volunteers went to Docker, while noting that it has a bit of a learning curve. I'll start and other people can chime in on it. over a Docker-based installīecause I have neither DSM nor Docker, someone else should comment. How in particular does the DSM package add functionality or convenience. Try using an IP address, or add the hostname you're using to the below: The host header sent by the client is not allowed