Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pages: [1] 2
1
Installation and Upgrades / Zentyal 3.3 - A Magnificent Fail
« on: December 20, 2013, 12:03:38 am »
Z3.2, well, that was a disaster. A huge number of patches and it still couldn't serve files.
Where were the members of the Zentyal hierarchy? Nowhere to be seen on this forum with the exception of what would appear to be the usual expert suspects with their excuses and fawning admiration of the latest release, which, in the case of z3.2, is a complete brat.
Seen on this forum were comments to the fore that it was great at this, not so great as that, really bloody awful at some but overall, if you read the Zentyal hype on the main website, a real alternative to a certain other server package, as in "Easy IT for Small Business A native Microsoft-compatible, all-in-one IT backoffice".
It's not. Simple as that.
It's broken, faulted, incomplete. A server application which cannot serve files is no server at all. It has even been admitted by a Zentyal fanboy that he/she (mmm, maybe fangirl, then?) uses yet another box, another solution, to serve files. No 'all-in-one' bit there then.
After three months of struggling with the blood sucking z3.2, personally, I have, on one system, regressed to core 3.0.26, for the time being with absolutely no upgrades. File sharing is no problem, no hassle. It just works. At least, for me. My other system has now been changed to something else. That took a couple of hours but works as expected and required.
I have left a small system grinding away on z3.2, just for the hell of it. Definitely an S&M server. I thought, yup, give it a go so I followed the invitation to upgrade to z3.3. Much like others, apparently, it screwed. It even told me that a package wasn't fully configured, one that I had never installed, suricata if you want, and spewed out loads of dpkg errors.
Zentyal, no, nope, not going there again. For the best part of forty years in IT or what used to be termed as data processing, networks and the like, this z3.2 and its feral z3.3 offspring is a dog. Heard too many promises of super upgrades and promised bug fixes heading towards the unattainable nirvanah.
According to Zentyal, the Community version and the Corporate version are the same or if you watch the recent presentation, they're not or rather, won't be. Not exactly a great starting point to demonstrate the abilities of an unknown package to prospective paying customers as is exactly what I was doing. If you haven't seen the video and have absolutely nothing worthwhile to do as in absolutely nothing, try this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDQqkqkOJKo
It's dreadful.
I don't know how many paying customers Zentyal has but judging by the comparitively low activity on this community forum, those commercial clients must have no problems. At all.
Where were the members of the Zentyal hierarchy? Nowhere to be seen on this forum with the exception of what would appear to be the usual expert suspects with their excuses and fawning admiration of the latest release, which, in the case of z3.2, is a complete brat.
Seen on this forum were comments to the fore that it was great at this, not so great as that, really bloody awful at some but overall, if you read the Zentyal hype on the main website, a real alternative to a certain other server package, as in "Easy IT for Small Business A native Microsoft-compatible, all-in-one IT backoffice".
It's not. Simple as that.
It's broken, faulted, incomplete. A server application which cannot serve files is no server at all. It has even been admitted by a Zentyal fanboy that he/she (mmm, maybe fangirl, then?) uses yet another box, another solution, to serve files. No 'all-in-one' bit there then.
After three months of struggling with the blood sucking z3.2, personally, I have, on one system, regressed to core 3.0.26, for the time being with absolutely no upgrades. File sharing is no problem, no hassle. It just works. At least, for me. My other system has now been changed to something else. That took a couple of hours but works as expected and required.
I have left a small system grinding away on z3.2, just for the hell of it. Definitely an S&M server. I thought, yup, give it a go so I followed the invitation to upgrade to z3.3. Much like others, apparently, it screwed. It even told me that a package wasn't fully configured, one that I had never installed, suricata if you want, and spewed out loads of dpkg errors.
Zentyal, no, nope, not going there again. For the best part of forty years in IT or what used to be termed as data processing, networks and the like, this z3.2 and its feral z3.3 offspring is a dog. Heard too many promises of super upgrades and promised bug fixes heading towards the unattainable nirvanah.
According to Zentyal, the Community version and the Corporate version are the same or if you watch the recent presentation, they're not or rather, won't be. Not exactly a great starting point to demonstrate the abilities of an unknown package to prospective paying customers as is exactly what I was doing. If you haven't seen the video and have absolutely nothing worthwhile to do as in absolutely nothing, try this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDQqkqkOJKo
It's dreadful.
I don't know how many paying customers Zentyal has but judging by the comparitively low activity on this community forum, those commercial clients must have no problems. At all.
2
Installation and Upgrades / Re: HELP!
« on: December 19, 2013, 11:19:54 pm »
Euros my boy, only euros will tickle Zentyal developers.
3
Installation and Upgrades / Re: Another day, another samba ... 3.2.11
« on: December 17, 2013, 09:46:19 pm »
Now, that's strange you should mention FreeNAS.
That's what I used, quite some time ago, before I decided to go the Zentyal route.
Well, with all the faffing about with Zentyal 3.2 and now 3.3 and both of them having reduced by life expectancy somewhat, methinks that's where I'll be returning to.
I can say that I never had the same heartache with FreeNAS as I have with this stuff.
Enjoy your day.
That's what I used, quite some time ago, before I decided to go the Zentyal route.
Well, with all the faffing about with Zentyal 3.2 and now 3.3 and both of them having reduced by life expectancy somewhat, methinks that's where I'll be returning to.
I can say that I never had the same heartache with FreeNAS as I have with this stuff.
Enjoy your day.
4
Installation and Upgrades / Zentyal 3.3 - The Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life....
« on: December 17, 2013, 04:34:53 am »
Zentyal 42 might be cool in a future or parallel time, but having suffered the screaming pains of the disfunctional z3.2 and the fawning comments of its excuse ready adherents, I thought...
Gasping for a solution, any solution to the glaring failures of z3.2, the way out was offered in the multitude of upgrades seductively enticed by the latest opportunity tofix upgrade Zentyal. (hoho...see below).
Having upgraded, deleted, reinstalled, shot the dog, purged, got drunk (again), nearly had sex with the ex wife and/or her boy/girl friend (ehm, remember the 'drunk' bit) all of it seperately and maybe at the same time, what is displayed on the near useless GUI......
E: Error: BrokenCount > 0 system updates
What in hell's name is that?
Now, keep it coming. There really has to be a story to this.
There is, naturally, more. For example, zentyal-samba and printers refuse to be removed/purged and end up with a whole pile of apt failures, all of which seem to depend on which fnkcui key is depressed and, of course, which way your arse is headed at the time.
File Sharing and Printers have vanished from the GUI. Well, file sharing is no loss as it was knackered anyway but the printing bit is a problem. CUPS is dead, no :631.
I am just so fed up with this which was not so bad in its previous icarnation.
Yup, getting a bit angry. Did you notice?
Comments?
Oh, just a bit of an addon... Terminal is proud to inform:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
zentyal-samba : Depends: zentyal-core (< 3.3) but 3.3 is installed
E: Unmet dependencies. Try using -f
Now between a rock and a hard place. Can't update, upgrade, -f, purge, smack the cat, delete, kill locks.
This 3.3 thing just seems, thus far, to be piling more on the previous heap.
Gasping for a solution, any solution to the glaring failures of z3.2, the way out was offered in the multitude of upgrades seductively enticed by the latest opportunity to
Having upgraded, deleted, reinstalled, shot the dog, purged, got drunk (again), nearly had sex with the ex wife and/or her boy/girl friend (ehm, remember the 'drunk' bit) all of it seperately and maybe at the same time, what is displayed on the near useless GUI......
E: Error: BrokenCount > 0 system updates
What in hell's name is that?
Now, keep it coming. There really has to be a story to this.
There is, naturally, more. For example, zentyal-samba and printers refuse to be removed/purged and end up with a whole pile of apt failures, all of which seem to depend on which fnkcui key is depressed and, of course, which way your arse is headed at the time.
File Sharing and Printers have vanished from the GUI. Well, file sharing is no loss as it was knackered anyway but the printing bit is a problem. CUPS is dead, no :631.
I am just so fed up with this which was not so bad in its previous icarnation.
Yup, getting a bit angry. Did you notice?
Comments?
Oh, just a bit of an addon... Terminal is proud to inform:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
zentyal-samba : Depends: zentyal-core (< 3.3) but 3.3 is installed
E: Unmet dependencies. Try using -f
Now between a rock and a hard place. Can't update, upgrade, -f, purge, smack the cat, delete, kill locks.
This 3.3 thing just seems, thus far, to be piling more on the previous heap.
5
Installation and Upgrades / Re: Zentyal Release Cycle (explained)
« on: December 14, 2013, 03:44:01 pm »
Thanks for that but I have been keeping track of that particular conversation.
Alas, with no success.
I have no particular of shares under /home but rather mounted shares under /mnt. I've just about given up fiddling with something, i.e. file sharing, which should intrinsically work, as it easily did prior to z3.2 and its many and ineffectual patches.
If it does transpire that a lot of mucking about with terminal is required, it makes a laughing stock of the Zentyal GUI and thus renders it useless. I'm waiting to see if a "Service Pack" is released in December with the hope that all this is, at last, rectified. I have already downgraded one system from z3.2 after wasting many hours trying to get file sharing to function.
If the situation is rectified, after three months, fine. If not, there seems to be no point of using Zentyal unless one wishes to downgrade.
Enjoy your day.
Alas, with no success.
I have no particular of shares under /home but rather mounted shares under /mnt. I've just about given up fiddling with something, i.e. file sharing, which should intrinsically work, as it easily did prior to z3.2 and its many and ineffectual patches.
If it does transpire that a lot of mucking about with terminal is required, it makes a laughing stock of the Zentyal GUI and thus renders it useless. I'm waiting to see if a "Service Pack" is released in December with the hope that all this is, at last, rectified. I have already downgraded one system from z3.2 after wasting many hours trying to get file sharing to function.
If the situation is rectified, after three months, fine. If not, there seems to be no point of using Zentyal unless one wishes to downgrade.
Enjoy your day.
6
Installation and Upgrades / Re: Zentyal 3.2: Samba, the Dawn of Something Else
« on: December 12, 2013, 05:08:07 pm »
Spiral,
Many thanks for your comments.
Indeed, on the systems to which I have referred, both of which are (normally) identical as far as file content is concerned, they sing the rsync song over VPN each night, the file count, outwith the os, is in excess of 300,000.
The share is created and user permissions granted. I have left one of them stewing away for more than two days at 67% but without a connection to its partner. Other than an initial burst of activity in top/htop, nothing seems to happen. There is no change to file permissions. I have attempted creating a share without initially setting user permissions but alas, same result.
z3.2, with all it's additional patches, may well take a long time to complete and possibly it would do given sufficient time but more than two days for each time a change is made? If that is indeed the case, it still renders it useless.
Enjoy your day.
Many thanks for your comments.
Indeed, on the systems to which I have referred, both of which are (normally) identical as far as file content is concerned, they sing the rsync song over VPN each night, the file count, outwith the os, is in excess of 300,000.
The share is created and user permissions granted. I have left one of them stewing away for more than two days at 67% but without a connection to its partner. Other than an initial burst of activity in top/htop, nothing seems to happen. There is no change to file permissions. I have attempted creating a share without initially setting user permissions but alas, same result.
z3.2, with all it's additional patches, may well take a long time to complete and possibly it would do given sufficient time but more than two days for each time a change is made? If that is indeed the case, it still renders it useless.
Enjoy your day.
7
Installation and Upgrades / Re: Zentyal Release Cycle (explained)
« on: December 12, 2013, 04:57:31 pm »
Only for the sake of completeness, I'll add my comment here too:
Well, that YouTube video was twentyseven minutes bludgeoned out of my life. Think I'll just go back to the less painful habit of chewing razor blades.
What did it tell me about the non functioning filesharing in z3.2? Well, nothing at all.
To sum up, it would appear that the release cycles are being changed, that community and commercial versions are the same but different and that z3.2 does have bugs but "don't tell anyone". As if! Service Packs are to be the norm every few months. Maybe. Next release due in December so perhaps that will cure the major difficulties with z3.2. Oh, wait a mo, this is December.
I'll hang on a bit longer to see what transpires with a server which is incapable of serving files, mainly as I must be nothing less than a mad masochist.
Well, that YouTube video was twentyseven minutes bludgeoned out of my life. Think I'll just go back to the less painful habit of chewing razor blades.
What did it tell me about the non functioning filesharing in z3.2? Well, nothing at all.
To sum up, it would appear that the release cycles are being changed, that community and commercial versions are the same but different and that z3.2 does have bugs but "don't tell anyone". As if! Service Packs are to be the norm every few months. Maybe. Next release due in December so perhaps that will cure the major difficulties with z3.2. Oh, wait a mo, this is December.
I'll hang on a bit longer to see what transpires with a server which is incapable of serving files, mainly as I must be nothing less than a mad masochist.
8
Installation and Upgrades / Re: Another day, another samba ... 3.2.11
« on: December 12, 2013, 04:52:00 pm »
Well, that YouTube video was twentyseven minutes bludgeoned out of my life. Think I'll just go back to the less painful habit of chewing razor blades.
What did it tell me about the non functioning filesharing in z3.2? Well, nothing at all.
To sum up, it would appear that the release cycles are being changed, that community and commercial versions are the same but different and that z3.2 does have bugs but "don't tell anyone". As if! Service Packs are to be the norm every few months. Maybe. Next release due in December so perhaps that will cure the major difficulties with z3.2. Oh, wait a mo, this is December.
I'll hang on a bit longer to see what transpires with a server which is incapable of serving files, mainly as I must be nothing less than a mad masochist.
What did it tell me about the non functioning filesharing in z3.2? Well, nothing at all.
To sum up, it would appear that the release cycles are being changed, that community and commercial versions are the same but different and that z3.2 does have bugs but "don't tell anyone". As if! Service Packs are to be the norm every few months. Maybe. Next release due in December so perhaps that will cure the major difficulties with z3.2. Oh, wait a mo, this is December.
I'll hang on a bit longer to see what transpires with a server which is incapable of serving files, mainly as I must be nothing less than a mad masochist.
9
Installation and Upgrades / Re: Another day, another samba ... 3.2.11
« on: December 11, 2013, 02:20:50 am »
Christian,
I thought I would sit on the side for a few days in the desperate hope that Zentyal would magically pop out another, yet another, patch which would allow z3.2 to actually share files.
Lo and behold, yet another upgrade to samba4. Getting a bit transfixed with the number and frequency of patches but I think that was available from maybe 9 December 2013? Excitement! At last. A server actually being capable of serving files might be within reach.
Err, no. Blinded by the 67% gremlin, yet again. Does not instil hope but then again, that was starved of confidence about five or six patches ago.
The simple fact is that Zentyal 3.2 is being touted as the be all and end all to those who, hitherto, may have elected to go the Microsoft SBS route. I assume that you have perused the zentyal.com site, not that it gives any in depth detail.
You have constantly attempted to defend Zentyal. You have constantly made excuses. You have suggested that it might be better to return to a previous version, which in itself, immediately poses questions as to the integrity of the currently offered version.
"If you need stable platform, why don't you revert back to previous stable version" That looks strangely like a comment from someone with a close connection to Zentyal corporate.
The simple fact is, following the release of z3.2 and the multitude of patches, Zentyal 3.2 does not correctly serve files, if at all. Hence, it does not work. It is and remains broken. A server, irrespective of its other claimed abilities, which is incapable of serving files, is no server.
As a consequence, at best, Zentyal 3.2 is extremely fragile. At worst, time consuming and totally useless.
Until Zentyal fixes this release, further conversation is pointless.
I thought I would sit on the side for a few days in the desperate hope that Zentyal would magically pop out another, yet another, patch which would allow z3.2 to actually share files.
Lo and behold, yet another upgrade to samba4. Getting a bit transfixed with the number and frequency of patches but I think that was available from maybe 9 December 2013? Excitement! At last. A server actually being capable of serving files might be within reach.
Err, no. Blinded by the 67% gremlin, yet again. Does not instil hope but then again, that was starved of confidence about five or six patches ago.
The simple fact is that Zentyal 3.2 is being touted as the be all and end all to those who, hitherto, may have elected to go the Microsoft SBS route. I assume that you have perused the zentyal.com site, not that it gives any in depth detail.
You have constantly attempted to defend Zentyal. You have constantly made excuses. You have suggested that it might be better to return to a previous version, which in itself, immediately poses questions as to the integrity of the currently offered version.
"If you need stable platform, why don't you revert back to previous stable version" That looks strangely like a comment from someone with a close connection to Zentyal corporate.
The simple fact is, following the release of z3.2 and the multitude of patches, Zentyal 3.2 does not correctly serve files, if at all. Hence, it does not work. It is and remains broken. A server, irrespective of its other claimed abilities, which is incapable of serving files, is no server.
As a consequence, at best, Zentyal 3.2 is extremely fragile. At worst, time consuming and totally useless.
Until Zentyal fixes this release, further conversation is pointless.
10
Installation and Upgrades / Re: Another day, another samba ... 3.2.11
« on: December 04, 2013, 10:22:14 pm »
Christian,
Thank you for the super quick response, much more rapid than the last. I’m surprised but grateful.
“I'm not suggesting to implement multiple boxes, I explain why I don't use Zentyal file sharing.”
Mmmm, no, you didn’t suggest but you did imply that having a totally seperate system (dedicated) to file sharing is a workable situation, which, of course, it is and always would be assuming unnecessary complication is what you want. Of course it is, and given rather more resources than I would assume Zentyal’s core target clientele to be, technically the only way to go.
May I, in turn, suggest that you, again miss the point, the whole point, the reason for the whole and entire existence of Zentyal 3.2, is that it, ostensibly, does the lot and easily without delving into the multifarious guts of Ubuntu/linux, where no man-in-the-street dare venture.
Dare I suggest even further, that possibly better, smoother, cheaper than a rather larger, bigger and who-gives-a-toss-about-small-business-users IT company who could, quite easily, lose a whack of business in the direction of an up and coming bunch which has the right solution at the right time and, of course, at the right price with a correct community attitude. It is Ubuntu/linux, after all or has the ethos escaped me?
“My next comment is for sure biased as I’m not a 3.2 user”. Given what you say, how could you possibly be biased, one way or the other, if, as you state, you are not a user of z3.2? Indeed, with that in mind, how can you make any comment on z3.2 in any functioning environment?
You further add, “File sharing is not beta but evolving quickly”. So, is that something like, ‘sitting on an aircraft, hundreds of souls ready for the off only to be told that it all is fine, except that the design of the wings is evolving quickly (but as of now, still not there)? .....hundreds of souls then run like hell off that plane.
Have to say that, “File sharing is not beta but evolving quickly”, in my simple parlance means, it’s fu…broken, doesn’t work but maybe it will, sometime in the future. Given that, all promises are always in the future and all lies and mistakes are in the past, that fills me with unbridled optimism, especially in an IT environment where optimism always comes to fruition and strangely, always but always in the future.
You further state, “For what I understand, main difference between community users and customers is not in term of features but in term of support…”.
I think you understand all too well. However, if it is, as you allude, unless I caught this obtusely, customers get it all as in a working model but community users pick up what they can get, fine. I won’t go any further except to say that Zentyal’s advertising stuff doesn’t bring that point into focus. At all.
Yes, this *is* a community forum. Note, ‘community’. I thought that’s where all issues were brought to the fore so that the ‘community’ could deal with issues, etc. Even bad ones.
You might also be aware that myself and others have posted z3.2 issues dedicated to technical problems we *do* face. Others have attempted to address the failure of z3.2, in the particular case of samba but as I can see thus far, with no success, even after ten patches.
Thank you for the super quick response, much more rapid than the last. I’m surprised but grateful.
“I'm not suggesting to implement multiple boxes, I explain why I don't use Zentyal file sharing.”
Mmmm, no, you didn’t suggest but you did imply that having a totally seperate system (dedicated) to file sharing is a workable situation, which, of course, it is and always would be assuming unnecessary complication is what you want. Of course it is, and given rather more resources than I would assume Zentyal’s core target clientele to be, technically the only way to go.
May I, in turn, suggest that you, again miss the point, the whole point, the reason for the whole and entire existence of Zentyal 3.2, is that it, ostensibly, does the lot and easily without delving into the multifarious guts of Ubuntu/linux, where no man-in-the-street dare venture.
Dare I suggest even further, that possibly better, smoother, cheaper than a rather larger, bigger and who-gives-a-toss-about-small-business-users IT company who could, quite easily, lose a whack of business in the direction of an up and coming bunch which has the right solution at the right time and, of course, at the right price with a correct community attitude. It is Ubuntu/linux, after all or has the ethos escaped me?
“My next comment is for sure biased as I’m not a 3.2 user”. Given what you say, how could you possibly be biased, one way or the other, if, as you state, you are not a user of z3.2? Indeed, with that in mind, how can you make any comment on z3.2 in any functioning environment?
You further add, “File sharing is not beta but evolving quickly”. So, is that something like, ‘sitting on an aircraft, hundreds of souls ready for the off only to be told that it all is fine, except that the design of the wings is evolving quickly (but as of now, still not there)? .....hundreds of souls then run like hell off that plane.
Have to say that, “File sharing is not beta but evolving quickly”, in my simple parlance means, it’s fu…broken, doesn’t work but maybe it will, sometime in the future. Given that, all promises are always in the future and all lies and mistakes are in the past, that fills me with unbridled optimism, especially in an IT environment where optimism always comes to fruition and strangely, always but always in the future.
You further state, “For what I understand, main difference between community users and customers is not in term of features but in term of support…”.
I think you understand all too well. However, if it is, as you allude, unless I caught this obtusely, customers get it all as in a working model but community users pick up what they can get, fine. I won’t go any further except to say that Zentyal’s advertising stuff doesn’t bring that point into focus. At all.
Yes, this *is* a community forum. Note, ‘community’. I thought that’s where all issues were brought to the fore so that the ‘community’ could deal with issues, etc. Even bad ones.
You might also be aware that myself and others have posted z3.2 issues dedicated to technical problems we *do* face. Others have attempted to address the failure of z3.2, in the particular case of samba but as I can see thus far, with no success, even after ten patches.
11
Installation and Upgrades / Re: Another day, another samba ... 3.2.11
« on: December 04, 2013, 05:50:43 pm »
Christian,
It matters not what is 'beta' inside z3.2 and whilst you are correct in that samba has changed significantly and moreover, the Zentyal implemention thereof, saying that Zentyal "has to..." is far, far too late. Now, if it was 'Zentyal had to...', then that would be a different matter entirely.
I'm not arguing the toss, at present, about Windows domain emulation or anything else although some of the other features appear to be on the flaky side too, simply the serving of files which is pretty much the raison d'etre of a server. I'm sure there is a large percentage of users, of whatever version, are utilising Zentyal as something akin to a NAS device. If that is the case, with the latest version, tough.
z3.2, I will say again, is being touted as a Microsoft SBS replacement. Not a beta replacement but a production replacement. Users will neither require nor understand why it seems necessary to have a different array of boxes to do other things, as in your comment that you personally use a different file server. You may have elected to do that but I doubt many others would.
It is a fact that file serving in z3.2 does not work.
A prospective user in particular will (practically) always obtain the advertised, existing version. Many will neither care nor be interested in previous versions probably on the assumption that the latest iteration of a product has been enhanced over the last and has been debugged to allow it to be all singing and all dancing but moreover, production. Not beta or anything else.
Could you imagine a conversation between a prospective customer and Zentyal sales, which might go something like, 'Yes, this works, so does that, this is new but, ehm, file sharing is in beta, it's a bit dodgy but we've released ten patches over the past few weeks so we're working on it'. Click, customer gone.
Zentyal, again as you put it, can 'rush' as much as it/they want. Fine but don't rush to announce a product as functional when clearly, it is not.
Like much in IT, especially something a bit different to the usual fare, it's only as good as its last success. Failure, in particular paid for failure, tends to get a reputation which sticks.
My own gripe, if that's the correct word, is the continual flow of patches for a product which is literally only weeks old and still it's unstable. Now, if there had been some guidelines, some feedback, indications as when this would be put to rights, fine. Well, for me it would be fine. Possibly not for others and I would assume definitely not for whatever number it is, who pay for support. Does this mean that those who are paying have the same problems or is it that the solution is available but only to paying customers? Unless I've missed something, I'm deafened by the silence from Zentyal on this forum.
If you consider this to be a "rant", OK. Maybe it is but nevertheless, z3.2 is not production as advertised, it may be, in truth beta but whatever its label, it does not work at least for those, as you say, who are not paying Zentyal customers.
We'll see what transpires over the coming days, weeks....whatever.
It matters not what is 'beta' inside z3.2 and whilst you are correct in that samba has changed significantly and moreover, the Zentyal implemention thereof, saying that Zentyal "has to..." is far, far too late. Now, if it was 'Zentyal had to...', then that would be a different matter entirely.
I'm not arguing the toss, at present, about Windows domain emulation or anything else although some of the other features appear to be on the flaky side too, simply the serving of files which is pretty much the raison d'etre of a server. I'm sure there is a large percentage of users, of whatever version, are utilising Zentyal as something akin to a NAS device. If that is the case, with the latest version, tough.
z3.2, I will say again, is being touted as a Microsoft SBS replacement. Not a beta replacement but a production replacement. Users will neither require nor understand why it seems necessary to have a different array of boxes to do other things, as in your comment that you personally use a different file server. You may have elected to do that but I doubt many others would.
It is a fact that file serving in z3.2 does not work.
A prospective user in particular will (practically) always obtain the advertised, existing version. Many will neither care nor be interested in previous versions probably on the assumption that the latest iteration of a product has been enhanced over the last and has been debugged to allow it to be all singing and all dancing but moreover, production. Not beta or anything else.
Could you imagine a conversation between a prospective customer and Zentyal sales, which might go something like, 'Yes, this works, so does that, this is new but, ehm, file sharing is in beta, it's a bit dodgy but we've released ten patches over the past few weeks so we're working on it'. Click, customer gone.
Zentyal, again as you put it, can 'rush' as much as it/they want. Fine but don't rush to announce a product as functional when clearly, it is not.
Like much in IT, especially something a bit different to the usual fare, it's only as good as its last success. Failure, in particular paid for failure, tends to get a reputation which sticks.
My own gripe, if that's the correct word, is the continual flow of patches for a product which is literally only weeks old and still it's unstable. Now, if there had been some guidelines, some feedback, indications as when this would be put to rights, fine. Well, for me it would be fine. Possibly not for others and I would assume definitely not for whatever number it is, who pay for support. Does this mean that those who are paying have the same problems or is it that the solution is available but only to paying customers? Unless I've missed something, I'm deafened by the silence from Zentyal on this forum.
If you consider this to be a "rant", OK. Maybe it is but nevertheless, z3.2 is not production as advertised, it may be, in truth beta but whatever its label, it does not work at least for those, as you say, who are not paying Zentyal customers.
We'll see what transpires over the coming days, weeks....whatever.
12
Installation and Upgrades / Re: Another day, another samba ... 3.2.11
« on: December 03, 2013, 10:50:40 pm »
Christian,
Your points are noted. You say, regarding the total lack of workable sharing in z3.2, "Let's be fair. Integrating something like Samba 4 which has much more constraints than previous version is a real challenge, given the fact that Zentyal has its own constraints too. I'm not saying this as an excuse however".
You then continue to make excuses in Zentyal's favour.
No doubt it was and is a real challenge to come up with a reasonable product which reflects Microsoft's offerings but my whole point is that after numerous patches over a period of more than two months, file sharing, the essence of a server, does not work. At best, z3.2 is fragile at worst, unusuable and I'm afraid to say that mostly, it is the latter.
Now, had it been released as a beta, a test, have a bash and find some bugs thing, well yes, no doubt some would have given it a go but it wasn't. It was released as a fully functioning, well upgraded suite of applications which addressed many of the shortcomings of the previous versions. In Zentyal's own advertising splurge for z3.2, "Are you looking for an IT infrastructure that simply works".
It doesn't work, simply or otherwise.
Now, had there been some information from Zentyal as to how they can see the problems being addressed and a bit of an idea as to when, that would be better, much better but thus far, nothing, zilch, silence.
The logs cannot be trusted to offer some reasonable cause for failure, zentyal.log seems to have a mind of its own and produces some fantastic output which differs depending on which way the wind blows.
I am happy to give z3.2 a bit longer to settle but in the interim, some feedback from Zentyal would be useful. Other than that, I will have no other option but to abandon z3.2.
Your points are noted. You say, regarding the total lack of workable sharing in z3.2, "Let's be fair. Integrating something like Samba 4 which has much more constraints than previous version is a real challenge, given the fact that Zentyal has its own constraints too. I'm not saying this as an excuse however".
You then continue to make excuses in Zentyal's favour.
No doubt it was and is a real challenge to come up with a reasonable product which reflects Microsoft's offerings but my whole point is that after numerous patches over a period of more than two months, file sharing, the essence of a server, does not work. At best, z3.2 is fragile at worst, unusuable and I'm afraid to say that mostly, it is the latter.
Now, had it been released as a beta, a test, have a bash and find some bugs thing, well yes, no doubt some would have given it a go but it wasn't. It was released as a fully functioning, well upgraded suite of applications which addressed many of the shortcomings of the previous versions. In Zentyal's own advertising splurge for z3.2, "Are you looking for an IT infrastructure that simply works".
It doesn't work, simply or otherwise.
Now, had there been some information from Zentyal as to how they can see the problems being addressed and a bit of an idea as to when, that would be better, much better but thus far, nothing, zilch, silence.
The logs cannot be trusted to offer some reasonable cause for failure, zentyal.log seems to have a mind of its own and produces some fantastic output which differs depending on which way the wind blows.
I am happy to give z3.2 a bit longer to settle but in the interim, some feedback from Zentyal would be useful. Other than that, I will have no other option but to abandon z3.2.
13
Installation and Upgrades / Another day, another samba ... 3.2.11
« on: December 02, 2013, 11:16:59 pm »
With bated breath, I noticed the updates. Could it be that z3.2 will now work as a file server, actually being able to serve...files?
After all, we're now into the third month since z3.2 was released and now with Zentyal's version of samba at number eleven, surely, at last, it will actually work. After all, a server without file sharing capability is like a pig without trotters.
Anyway, updates all done, even rebooted it which was quite brave as the system is remote, and keyed in the details of a small testshare under /mnt. What happens? Well, back to,
Some modules reported error when saving changes . More information on the logs in /var/log/zentyal/
The following modules failed while saving their changes, their state is unknown: samba
I'm not even going to post log output as zentyal.log has told me more made up stories and lies than a politician caught with his hand in the till. As far as posting another bug, pointless, as samba entries have moved in an taken that over.
Still doesn't work. samba 3.2.99 anyone?
Enjoy your day.
After all, we're now into the third month since z3.2 was released and now with Zentyal's version of samba at number eleven, surely, at last, it will actually work. After all, a server without file sharing capability is like a pig without trotters.
Anyway, updates all done, even rebooted it which was quite brave as the system is remote, and keyed in the details of a small testshare under /mnt. What happens? Well, back to,
Some modules reported error when saving changes . More information on the logs in /var/log/zentyal/
The following modules failed while saving their changes, their state is unknown: samba
I'm not even going to post log output as zentyal.log has told me more made up stories and lies than a politician caught with his hand in the till. As far as posting another bug, pointless, as samba entries have moved in an taken that over.
Still doesn't work. samba 3.2.99 anyone?
Enjoy your day.
14
Installation and Upgrades / Re: SAMBA Error On Activation + SAMBA DNS Update Fail + Join a Windows client Fail
« on: December 01, 2013, 02:34:38 pm »
I'm sorry to say that the problems experienced by you with z3.2 and the many variations and patches of samba, and other modules, now at 3.2.10, are shared by others.
I originally upgraded a working system, stupid, I now know, to z3.2. Utter failure. Since the appearance of z3.2, I've installed, reinstalled, deleted, changed, upgraded, sworn, wished for better days but to no avail. Samba is broken, not working, dead despite the many attempts to do something with it. All, may I add, in total silence from the Zentyal people who have never acknowledged, in as many words, that z3.2 has more bugs than a dead cat on a hot day.
I can empathise with you and others in your and their plight but short of waiting for a solution that actually works or just taking to the bottle, reverting to the previous version may be the best way forward, ehm, backward, hopefully, only in the short term.
I originally upgraded a working system, stupid, I now know, to z3.2. Utter failure. Since the appearance of z3.2, I've installed, reinstalled, deleted, changed, upgraded, sworn, wished for better days but to no avail. Samba is broken, not working, dead despite the many attempts to do something with it. All, may I add, in total silence from the Zentyal people who have never acknowledged, in as many words, that z3.2 has more bugs than a dead cat on a hot day.
I can empathise with you and others in your and their plight but short of waiting for a solution that actually works or just taking to the bottle, reverting to the previous version may be the best way forward, ehm, backward, hopefully, only in the short term.
15
Installation and Upgrades / Re: File Sharing module (Samba) won't start
« on: November 29, 2013, 02:39:10 pm »
Well, after the last pile of patches the other day, now at 3.2.10, I tried it again and again and again and.........flop!
I did get a tad bitchy, having spent so much of my recent life on this, and ended up leaving some thoughts, http://forum.zentyal.org/index.php/topic,18954.0.html
I would love to get it working but methinks I'll go back to ye olde z3.0. Fortunately, I retained those drives for both of my systems. What a hassle!
What is worrying is that, unless I'm totally blind, there seems to be no input from Moderators, experts, Zentyal people at all, on this subject, other than various flurries of even more patches which, thus far, don't work.
Enjoy your day.
I did get a tad bitchy, having spent so much of my recent life on this, and ended up leaving some thoughts, http://forum.zentyal.org/index.php/topic,18954.0.html
I would love to get it working but methinks I'll go back to ye olde z3.0. Fortunately, I retained those drives for both of my systems. What a hassle!
What is worrying is that, unless I'm totally blind, there seems to be no input from Moderators, experts, Zentyal people at all, on this subject, other than various flurries of even more patches which, thus far, don't work.
Enjoy your day.
Pages: [1] 2