Thinks like my opnsense router are best updated when no one else is using the network.
The docker containers I like to update manually after checking the release logs. Doesn't take long and I often find out about cool new features perusing the release notes.
Projects will sometimes have major updates that break things and I strongly prefer having everything super stable until I have time to sit down and update.
11 stacks, 30+ containers. Borg backups runs automatically to various repositories. Zfs auto snap snot also runs automatically to create rapid backups.
I use unraid as a nas and proxmox for dockers and VMs.
Mainly because of the number of things I have that I rely on every day and definitely don't want to break until I'm ready to upgrade it and have time to fix it if it does break.
I know many do use :latest but having a service break while I'm away or travelling really sucks
Then again it seems like people were using a docker volume to save all their precious photos rather than a mount point on the host. Also seems insane to me.
Who was pulling the dicker compose and just straight up running the GitHub version on their server. That seems crazy. Even pulling :latest tag seems crazy to me but this is another level.
This change is only breaking if you are running someone else's docker compose on your server without looking at it.
Also who was running their entire photo album in a docker volume rather than a mount point on the host. Another insane decision. To be fair, the default docker compose never should have had that. It should have been a mount point right from the start.
Is this a fresh install? Why is there any debugging? To just connect with an ip requires no config files at all.
I only changed 1 config file add the crfs URL and also added some lines for oAuth. No config file changes are needed by default. It's all docker compose
This is different than the actual seafile client app which is the standard folder sync / Dropbox like behavior that most users will only ever use. All the other things I mentioned above are for advanced use cases only and not normally needed but very nice to have.
This seems like an issue where the wireguard is not using the correct DNS server. Does the wireguard DNS setting point to the router?
A diagrams might help me to see what is going on more clearly.