Oh ok, then my question stands, how to get to general? Can I wait for this to become general, or do I need to revert?
Software page now shows 25.10.1 as general? Which is … a little unexpected tbh.
You probably don’t want to downgrade, so you will have to wait. What difference does it make, anyway? Is 25.10 somehow unstable or not working for you? Any issues?
None of the above, just curious, heard talk about the different streams months ago, but still yet to see it arrive.
The option for General appeared in 25.10.1 some time ago and I had switched to it, but in order to get the upgrade to 25.10.2 visible (at this stage) I had to go back to Early Adopter.
Now that I’m on 25.10.2 there is no more General option. So it seems that .1 and .2 are disjoint in a sense. It’s not the case that the whole 25.10 series has General availability, yet.
As per earlier dev comments in the thread, I guess it will likely change in a few days.
That’s to be expected; the status is determined for each particular release. I wouldn’t be surprised to see .2 promoted to General shortly, but it was just released yesterday–it’ll likely still be EA for a bit.
As @dan indicated, we treat each version (25.10.2) independently of the release train (25.10).
The 25.10.1 version qualified for “general” use, but not “mission-critical”. This required weeks of runtime with only minor issues.
We expected 25.10.2 to quickly qualify for “general”. However, we do wait for feedback and bug reports before making the decision. Community testing is important.
At this stage, we think a hotfix will be needed to address an Ethernet bonding issue that was alerting every 30 minutes. So 25.10.2 will not go to “general”. More info next week.
While we are disappointed that there is an unexpected bug in 25.10.2… we are delighted that the new software update advisor did avoid “general” users updating and finding an issue. It’s the perfect example of why setting up for “Early adopter” or “general” is important.
I had to roll back as dataprotection tab and jobs are boken after migration. Rollback restored dataprotection services and jobs:
Error Name: EINVAL
Error Code: 22
Reason: 4 validation errors for CloudCredentialQueryResult
result.list[CloudCredentialQueryResultItem].2.provider.S3.endpoint.literal[‘’]
Input should be ‘’ [type=literal_error, input_value=‘s1d6.va.idrivee2-52.com’, input_type=str]
For further information visit Redirecting...
result.list[CloudCredentialQueryResultItem].2.provider.S3.endpoint.function-after[str(), url[‘http’,‘https’]]
Input should be a valid URL, relative URL without a base [type=url_parsing, input_value=‘s1d6.va.idrivee2-52.com’, input_type=str]
For further information visit Redirecting...
result.CloudCredentialQueryResultItem
Input should be a valid dictionary or instance of CloudCredentialQueryResultItem [type=model_type, input_value=[{‘id’: 1, ‘name’: ‘nas-m…_upload_parts’: 10000}}], input_type=list]
For further information visit Redirecting...
result.int
Input should be a valid integer [type=int_type, input_value=[{‘id’: 1, ‘name’: ‘nas-m…upload_parts’: 10000}}], input_type=list]
For further information visit Redirecting...*
Error Class: ValidationError
Trace: Traceback (most recent call last):
File “/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/middlewared/api/base/server/ws_handler/rpc.py”, line 361, in process_method_call
result = await method.call(app, id*, params)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File “/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/middlewared/api/base/server/method.py”, line 69, in call
return await self._dump_result(app, methodobj, result)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File “/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/middlewared/api/base/server/method.py”, line 72, in _dump_result
return self.middleware.dump_result(self.serviceobj, methodobj, app, result)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File “/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/middlewared/main.py”, line 864, in dump_result
return serialize_result(new_style_returns_model, result, expose_secrets, self.dump_result_allow_fallback)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File “/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/middlewared/api/base/handler/result.py”, line 23, in serialize_result
return model(result=result).model_dump(
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File “/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/pydantic/main.py”, line 212, in init
validated_self = self.pydantic_validator.validate_python(data, self_instance=self)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
pydantic_core._pydantic_core.ValidationError: 4 validation errors for CloudCredentialQueryResult
result.list[CloudCredentialQueryResultItem].2.provider.S3.endpoint.literal[’']
Input should be ‘’ [type=literal_error, input_value=‘s1d6.va.idrivee2-52.com’, input_type=str]
For further information visit Redirecting...
result.list[CloudCredentialQueryResultItem].2.provider.S3.endpoint.function-after[str(), url[‘http’,‘https’]]
Input should be a valid URL, relative URL without a base [type=url_parsing, input_value=‘s1d6.va.idrivee2-52.com’, input_type=str]
For further information visit Redirecting...
result.CloudCredentialQueryResultItem
Input should be a valid dictionary or instance of CloudCredentialQueryResultItem [type=model_type, input_value=[{‘id’: 1, ‘name’: ‘nas-m…_upload_parts’: 10000}}], input_type=list]
For further information visit Redirecting...
result.int
Input should be a valid integer [type=int_type, input_value=[{‘id’: 1, ‘name’: ‘nas-m…_upload_parts’: 10000}}], input_type=list]
For further information visit Redirecting...
You should probably use Report a Bug and submit debug dumps for the broken and working systems.
Yes, this is the known bug that requires a hot fix.
Please report a bug and provide the NAS-ticket ID.
Its always useful to document what version you update from and to.
In this case, what cloud vendor are you using? (idrive.com)
Well I absolutely would have done so, had I known. People that know far more than me thought General was 25.04
I was able to successfully submit a bug, I assumed I was not permitted given the login errors I was experiencing all last night on the Jira platform.
After upgrading to TrueNAS 25.10.2, a recurring alert appears:
“Failed to check for alert BondStatus: Netlink error: 16”
This system has no bond interfaces configured and the bonding kernel
module is not loaded. Both confirmed via:
ip link show type bond→ no outputlsmod | grep bonding→ no output
The BondStatus alert source appears to make an unconditional Netlink
query regardless of whether any bond interfaces exist. On systems with
no bonding subsystem active, the kernel returns EBUSY (errno 16), which
is not handled gracefully — instead of returning an empty alert list,
the source raises an exception that surfaces as a failed alert check.
Expected behavior: if no bond interfaces are present, BondStatus should
return an empty result silently.
The alert is cosmetic and does not affect network functionality, but it
generates persistent noise in the alert panel on every check cycle and
cannot be permanently dismissed.
@Mark_Colatosti please post a link or the ticket number in this thread.
Is this a staged roll out? Both of my boxes say…
Current version: 25.10.1 System is up to date!
Is your profile set to General or to Early Adopter?
We are trying to avoid “word-of-mouth” software-status information which is invariably out of date or occasionally hallucinating.
The place to check is software status page...
For users that are very conservative.. we alsp publish the version used by “mission-critical” enterprises.