Haha, yeah. It does make me wonder whether I should bin the whole TrueNAS approach entirely. It seems like a tremendous faff when I could just have the files mirrored to another disk as a backup.

The hard disks are on a separate power supply. The TrueNAS software is running on an old laptop so it effectively has UPS protection.

Yeah, another vote for Caddy. I’ve run nginx as a reverse proxy before and it wasn’t too bad, but Caddy is even easier. Needs naff-all resources too. My ProxMox VM for it has 256 MB of RAM!

Which logs specifically should I be checking?

zpool doesn’t see any pools to import. The system does see the disks but I’m not sure why the disks aren’t being checked for pools.

I’ll give it a shot. I was asking here in case it was a common thing that everyone else knows about (i.e. “Oh you’re running TrueNAS without a UPS? That’s a non starter, everyone knows that”.

Is there anything we can do to push the needle back? I’m so sick of this authoritarian bullshit.

It seems to either be completely fine and a power cycle makes no difference - or it loses the whole structure. I don’t know how I’m supposed to pull the disks back in. It doesn’t seem to detect that they’re already setup as part of a pool.

The pool I’ve created doesn’t vanish but it seems my only option for it is “manage devices” which takes me to the “Add VDEVs to the Pool” menu where my three disks show up as unassigned. The only presented option seems to be to wipe them in order to add them back to the pool.

Trying to search for this stuff doesn’t seem to give me anything useful. I don’t know what the intended behaviour is and what it is that I’m doing wrong. I would expect what should happen is that the disks come back online and get automatically added back to the pool again but no, apparently not?

I mostly find the framing tiresome. It’s a sort of learned helplessness.

It’s trying to frame life as something one is only “correctly” handling if everything is planned out in the tiniest detail. Anyone trying to do anything of the slightest complexity knows that’s not a good way to manage tasks.

Of course, if one goes through life imagining that what one should be doing is being an adult with a plan of infinite complexity and anything less is “pretending” (or “winging it”, or whatever) then it’s easy to keep the infantilising personal narrative going. “I’m not a real grown-up” and shit like that.

Defining a “real grown up” as a hyper-competent person found only in fiction or through the eyes of a young child then yeah, we’re all making it up as we go. But given that’s a bloody stupid standard, I think we can all be a little nicer to ourselves.

I’d argue that a great many people know what they’re doing but a fuck-tonne of them don’t know how to give themselves the credit they deserve.

It’s like they’re waiting for some mystical uber adult to give them a certificate saying they’re competent enough to trust their own judgement.

What is it people think “knowing what you’re doing” entails?

Most of what we do day to day is not new in terms of the human experience. We eat, sleep, work, socialise, raise our children, etc… Most people manage this, usually through a combination of learning from others and their own mistakes. Are a lot of people just not able to acknowledge their own competence at these things?

Trademark reasons, surely?

We’ve tried nothing and we’re all out of ideas!

My first is due in a couple of months and I’m pleased to report that parking is free at our local hospital!

UK perspective: they weren’t already?

Get those HPV vaccines, by the sound of it. What a naff article.

I messed around trying to get Redhat 7.2 or 7.3 working but gave up (Q1 or Q2 2002). I later experimented with SuSe (or however it was stylised in Q1 2005), messed about with Knoppix and a few other distros, before properly going all-in on Ubuntu 5.04 when I was 18.

…and it’s the EU with a steel chair!

I’ve yet to actually find out what it’s useful to me for. I don’t need shit synopses of things.

Silly me, looking at the About page.

A technical description?

I don’t know the first thing about Bonfire. I literally only know its name, and even then, I’m not sure if it’s even an it.

It might be an organisation, a single tool, a framework, a development environment, a service, I genuinely don’t know.

A “mission-driven project” is a meaningless phrase that can be applied to almost anything.

For you it’s buzzwords, for other people it means a very specific positioning.

Positioning what?

Looking at the about page because the concept sounds like it might be really cool…

Started in 2020, Bonfire is a mission-driven project creating
sustainable open-source tools and building blocks for communities to
engage meaningfully, coordinate as peers, make collective decisions,
and cooperate effectively – all interconnected with countless
federated apps across the web. We’re dedicated to nurturing digital
spaces that encourage vibrant community participation and impactful
collaboration.

We endeavour to foster a transparent, inclusive, and empowering
environment. This ethos drives us to build connected, democratic, and
vibrant digital spaces, supporting communities around the world to
connect, grow, and flourish.

Who writes this stuff? It’s meaningless buzzword drivel.

What’s the point in an about page’s first text block if not to give a high level overview of what the thing is?

It might well be something I could be enthusiastic about but I took one look and thought “You’ve given me no reason to try to decode this and there’s better things I could do with a sunny Saturday”.

About pages are super important and this project is being let down by it.