Cloudron makes it easy to run web apps like WordPress, Nextcloud, GitLab on your server. Find out more or install now.


Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Bookmarks
  • Search
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

Cloudron Forum

Apps | Demo | Docs | Install
  1. Cloudron Forum
  2. Announcements
  3. What's coming in 4.2

What's coming in 4.2

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Announcements
38 Posts 9 Posters 9.6k Views 9 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • nebulonN nebulon

    @d19dotca yes that is intentional, what we do is we have a white/black list of domains to which we push out updates one after another. This allows more fine grained testing from our side. You can send us an email at support@cloudron.io and we can whitelist yours if you want to test it sooner.

    d19dotcaD Offline
    d19dotcaD Offline
    d19dotca
    wrote on last edited by
    #16

    @nebulon & @girish - my Cloudron still shows 4.1.7 when I check for updates. I would definitely say this should be a feature request then that is a user manually clicks/taps the Check For Updates button, the latest build is presented. It would only generally be used when someone is aware of an update and expecting to install it. I understand the blacklist/whitelist thing but I would say it should be ignored when the button is pressed. The rollout using a blacklist/whitelist should only be done for those who don't manually use the button so it notifies them when it's ready.

    --
    Dustin Dauncey
    www.d19.ca

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • nebulonN Offline
      nebulonN Offline
      nebulon
      Staff
      wrote on last edited by
      #17

      @d19dotca we don't push out 4.2.0 yet, even when checking for updates manually, has good reasons. We have found a few regressions which will affect existing Cloudrons, for example the stats view will miss data since that release would not reconfigure collectd as required. Newly created Cloudrons are not affected here.

      d19dotcaD 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • nebulonN nebulon

        @d19dotca we don't push out 4.2.0 yet, even when checking for updates manually, has good reasons. We have found a few regressions which will affect existing Cloudrons, for example the stats view will miss data since that release would not reconfigure collectd as required. Newly created Cloudrons are not affected here.

        d19dotcaD Offline
        d19dotcaD Offline
        d19dotca
        wrote on last edited by
        #18

        @nebulon So to confirm then... 4.2 isn't really released at all then yet. It's pretty much in a "beta" state, used for new installs but nobody with an existing install will have received it yet unless we formally request our domain be whitelisted. Is that correct? There seems to be confusion here with the way things are being worded. 17 days ago it was stated "The initial 4.2 was pushed out yesterday" but now you're saying "we don't push out 4.2.0 yet" -- this is creating a bit of confusion.

        --
        Dustin Dauncey
        www.d19.ca

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • nebulonN Offline
          nebulonN Offline
          nebulon
          Staff
          wrote on last edited by
          #19

          Yes correct, the confusion comes from the fact that we wanted to release it normally but found regressions which are blocking it for now. Sorry about the communication here.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • yusfY Offline
            yusfY Offline
            yusf
            wrote on last edited by
            #20

            It's out!

            Add external LDAP server integration

            This is very good. Now if only the reverse was possible too we'd have ourselves a real symphony. 🙂

            murgeroM 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • yusfY yusf

              It's out!

              Add external LDAP server integration

              This is very good. Now if only the reverse was possible too we'd have ourselves a real symphony. 🙂

              murgeroM Offline
              murgeroM Offline
              murgero
              App Dev
              wrote on last edited by
              #21

              @yusf If you don't mind a bit of a "hack-n-slash" you could open up ports 389 and 636 in iptables to access the cloudron ldap server remotely 🐷

              --
              https://urgero.org
              ~ Professional Nerd. Freelance Programmer. ~

              yusfY 1 Reply Last reply
              1
              • murgeroM murgero

                @yusf If you don't mind a bit of a "hack-n-slash" you could open up ports 389 and 636 in iptables to access the cloudron ldap server remotely 🐷

                yusfY Offline
                yusfY Offline
                yusf
                wrote on last edited by
                #22

                @murgero That sure is filthy but if also IP restricted and/or tunneled it may be okay? 🐽

                murgeroM 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • yusfY yusf

                  @murgero That sure is filthy but if also IP restricted and/or tunneled it may be okay? 🐽

                  murgeroM Offline
                  murgeroM Offline
                  murgero
                  App Dev
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #23

                  @yusf You can restrict the port in IPTABLES as well, I don't remember if cloudron uses just IPTables or UFW but here is a rule for both that would work for routing to internal networks only:

                  UFW:
                  ufw allow from 192.168.1.0/24 to any port 389
                  (This allows from the 192.168.1.0 network to TCP/UDP port 389. You can change the word "any" to "tcp" to restrict it to TCP only as well.)

                  IPTABLES:
                  iptables -I INPUT -p tcp -s 192.168.1.0/24 --dport 389 -j ACCEPT

                  Please research what cloudron uses as it's firewall (I am almost positive it is iptables).

                  Also note - This is an unsupported modification too.

                  Also also note - You can probably make an app that can proxy this connection instead, using a different port, you can proxy to the LDAP server instead. (Say port 1389 as an example). This would probably work better since LDAP clients normally allow you to configure a port to connect to anyway.

                  --
                  https://urgero.org
                  ~ Professional Nerd. Freelance Programmer. ~

                  yusfY 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • murgeroM murgero

                    @yusf You can restrict the port in IPTABLES as well, I don't remember if cloudron uses just IPTables or UFW but here is a rule for both that would work for routing to internal networks only:

                    UFW:
                    ufw allow from 192.168.1.0/24 to any port 389
                    (This allows from the 192.168.1.0 network to TCP/UDP port 389. You can change the word "any" to "tcp" to restrict it to TCP only as well.)

                    IPTABLES:
                    iptables -I INPUT -p tcp -s 192.168.1.0/24 --dport 389 -j ACCEPT

                    Please research what cloudron uses as it's firewall (I am almost positive it is iptables).

                    Also note - This is an unsupported modification too.

                    Also also note - You can probably make an app that can proxy this connection instead, using a different port, you can proxy to the LDAP server instead. (Say port 1389 as an example). This would probably work better since LDAP clients normally allow you to configure a port to connect to anyway.

                    yusfY Offline
                    yusfY Offline
                    yusf
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #24

                    @murgero Thanks! Though very unsupported also very interesting. Thought about the proxy app approach but you know my level id of expertise: not enough. 😆

                    murgeroM 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • yusfY yusf

                      @murgero Thanks! Though very unsupported also very interesting. Thought about the proxy app approach but you know my level id of expertise: not enough. 😆

                      murgeroM Offline
                      murgeroM Offline
                      murgero
                      App Dev
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #25

                      @yusf Maybe it will be my weekend project this week. Build an LDAP Proxy app for Cloudron.

                      I'll hit you up on Matrix if I get something working. 🙂

                      --
                      https://urgero.org
                      ~ Professional Nerd. Freelance Programmer. ~

                      iamthefijI 1 Reply Last reply
                      2
                      • murgeroM murgero

                        @yusf Maybe it will be my weekend project this week. Build an LDAP Proxy app for Cloudron.

                        I'll hit you up on Matrix if I get something working. 🙂

                        iamthefijI Offline
                        iamthefijI Offline
                        iamthefij
                        App Dev
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #26

                        @murgero I’ve been meaning to do the same.

                        Should be doable with something like HAProxy, but I wanted to use some better auth mechanism, so I’ve been working on this: https://git.iamthefij.com/iamthefij/dockamole

                        The server is essentially just an ssh server that is configured to disallow running commands and only allow port forwarding. The client can be run anywhere and it exposes the ports for you.

                        I’m planning to run a server on my Cloudron to forward LDAP and Graphite (hopefully), and then I can deploy a client on my other VPS. I also plan to do the same with my NAS at home so I can have my VPS access it without exposing http access to my home network.

                        There are many ways to do this though. 🙂

                        fbartelsF 1 Reply Last reply
                        1
                        • iamthefijI iamthefij

                          @murgero I’ve been meaning to do the same.

                          Should be doable with something like HAProxy, but I wanted to use some better auth mechanism, so I’ve been working on this: https://git.iamthefij.com/iamthefij/dockamole

                          The server is essentially just an ssh server that is configured to disallow running commands and only allow port forwarding. The client can be run anywhere and it exposes the ports for you.

                          I’m planning to run a server on my Cloudron to forward LDAP and Graphite (hopefully), and then I can deploy a client on my other VPS. I also plan to do the same with my NAS at home so I can have my VPS access it without exposing http access to my home network.

                          There are many ways to do this though. 🙂

                          fbartelsF Offline
                          fbartelsF Offline
                          fbartels
                          App Dev
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #27

                          @iamthefij said in What's coming in 4.2:

                          There are many ways to do this though.

                          True. I was more thinking of using stunnel for this.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • yusfY Offline
                            yusfY Offline
                            yusf
                            wrote on last edited by yusf
                            #28

                            @yusf said in What's coming in 4.2:

                            It's out!

                            Nope, it's not out. I've recieved a notification of the new version on one Cloudron but I can't install it yet.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • nebulonN Offline
                              nebulonN Offline
                              nebulon
                              Staff
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #29

                              It is not out yet due to regressions in the app task management. We are working on this and will announce it when it is really out. Sorry for all those update available notifications which appeared to have been issued in between.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              1
                              • girishG Offline
                                girishG Offline
                                girish
                                Staff
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #30

                                Alright, we have started rolling out 4.2 slowly. If someone here wants it early, ping us on the chat as always. Thanks for your patience!

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                1
                                • yusfY Offline
                                  yusfY Offline
                                  yusf
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #31

                                  I’ve received another notification saying

                                  Cloudron v4.2.5 is available

                                  but this update too is nowhere to be found.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • girishG Offline
                                    girishG Offline
                                    girish
                                    Staff
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #32

                                    @yusf Did it work out?

                                    4.2 is now available for all

                                    yusfY 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • girishG girish

                                      @yusf Did it work out?

                                      4.2 is now available for all

                                      yusfY Offline
                                      yusfY Offline
                                      yusf
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #33

                                      @girish It did update, yes. 🎉

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • necrevistonnezrN Online
                                        necrevistonnezrN Online
                                        necrevistonnezr
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #34

                                        I have one SSD and one HDD in my homeserver running Cloudron 4.2.6 - neither are shown in "Graphs"...

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • girishG Offline
                                          girishG Offline
                                          girish
                                          Staff
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #35

                                          @necrevistonnezr Can you open a separate thread for that (since I am going to close this release thread and announce 4.2.). Can you also please provide the df -h output in the post. Thanks!

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • Bookmarks
                                          • Search