WARNING ! Actual snapshot does not work! (PPPOE WAN FAILS)

louis2

As the title suggest, I lost the connectivity to my provider after upgrading to today snapshot (Sat Jan 15 06:14:16)

Luckily enough, due to the kind of problem, the local network was still OK, so I could still reach pfSense.

I ^fixed^ the problem by SSH into the system and changed the folder kernel to kernel.27notok and renamed the folder kernel.old to kernel.

After a boot the router did work again.

Louis

w0w

@louis2 said in WARNING ! Actual snapshot does not work! (PPPOE WAN FAILS):

As the title suggest, I lost the connectivity to my provider after upgrading to today snapshot (Sat Jan 15 06:14:16)

Luckily enough, due to the kind of problem, the local network was still OK, so I could still reach pfSense.

I ^fixed^ the problem by SSH into the system and changed the folder kernel to kernel.27notok and renamed the folder kernel.old to kernel.

After a boot the router did work again.

Louis

Did the same, got it up and running. Also switched to the RC branch on the update settings and did

pkg install -f pfSense pfSense-base pfSense-default-config pfSense-kernel-pfSense pfSense-rc

Now have RC version and working PPPoE. Thanks to https://forum.netgate.com/post/962715

jimp

The problem you hit only happens on 2.7 which was just started and very alpha, not 2.6.x which is what this category on the forum is for. Someone reading the title could get the wrong impression that 2.6.x was broken.

louis2

@jimp

Yep that is probably true, however

I was automatically switched from 2.6 to 2.7 ....
there is no forum thread yet related to 2.7

and given your understandable reaction, both items are perhaps not optimal

jimp

There is a general "development" category for things that don't have a specific subcategory, and that's where this is being moved.

w0w

@jimp
I understand that it's a matter of inattention, but in the same way, I'm switching to the next Development branch for the second time. And I'm not alone. Is it possible to somehow change the transition mechanism so that it, the transition, occurs more consciously? For example, it just stops updating until the user manually selects 2.7 or any other newer branch, or it does automatically switch to the release candidate, which seems more logical than jumping to the alpha version?

jimp

It isn't that fine-grained really, it's been told to track development snapshots so that's what it's doing. The RC branches off the main development line, so you have to pick it manually when it appears.

louis2

@jimp

Jim the leas you could do IMHO is to open a new 2.7 related Thread !!

jimp

We'll get to that in time, right now we are focused primarily on finishing up 2.6.0 CE/21.02 Plus. 2.7.0 is alpha and not a priority.

w0w

@jimp
You are absolutely right, the update logic is clear. But it's also a fact that many people join beta, not alpha, and I think expect a different logic, like alpha->beta->release candidate->release. I think some kind of warning about new versions would be enough. Naturally, this is absolutely not a priority, but it would be nice.