I don't know whether to call this a bug, a feature, a coincidence, or fumble fingers.
I use my FreeNAS box (call this FN1) to back up the other machines on the house net. It's worked without flaw or complaint for a year or so now. I've recovered enough financially to give it its own backup, so I'm in the process of getting an earlier incarnation of a server back on line and at the moment it's doing the several-days of filling up the first replication from the front-end NAS box.
The front-end net machines use a background backup utility. This utility start complaining that its backup disk was full. Odd - I have just been tinkering with that machine, and it's using 4 out of 12TB; nowhere near full.
A little snooping turned up the fact that the cifs shares on FV1 changed to "unix" permissions. Flip that back to "Windows" and backups start. But how did it get to "unix"?
There are two candidates: I moved up to 9.10 on FN1, and I set up FN2 and started the replication task. I'm inclined to think that the move to 9.10 on FN1 did the deed. But why and how? I just changed the "train" to 9.10, pulled in the update, and then told it "go". Does the update change the permissions style on shares? Or did I fumble-finger it in mucking around?
I use my FreeNAS box (call this FN1) to back up the other machines on the house net. It's worked without flaw or complaint for a year or so now. I've recovered enough financially to give it its own backup, so I'm in the process of getting an earlier incarnation of a server back on line and at the moment it's doing the several-days of filling up the first replication from the front-end NAS box.
The front-end net machines use a background backup utility. This utility start complaining that its backup disk was full. Odd - I have just been tinkering with that machine, and it's using 4 out of 12TB; nowhere near full.
A little snooping turned up the fact that the cifs shares on FV1 changed to "unix" permissions. Flip that back to "Windows" and backups start. But how did it get to "unix"?
There are two candidates: I moved up to 9.10 on FN1, and I set up FN2 and started the replication task. I'm inclined to think that the move to 9.10 on FN1 did the deed. But why and how? I just changed the "train" to 9.10, pulled in the update, and then told it "go". Does the update change the permissions style on shares? Or did I fumble-finger it in mucking around?