AMTM MD5 Hash Mismatch

[Istvanwagon]

Hi All,

Novice but longer-term user here. I went into AMTM and saw a red warning about an "MD5 hash mismatch"; also Diversion (v5.4) and uiDivStats (v4.0.4) were out of date. I updated all of these items but tried AMTM a few times and may have force updated it. Also, Diversion failed at least one but is now up to v5.4.1. When I log into AMTM, though, I see the screen shot below showing there is still an MD5 update needed; also, it shows diversion and entware not using the latest version. I have tried to update AMTM a few more times, but no luck. What is going on here?

Not sure if it is related, but I suspect my USB swap drive may be failing (or maybe has failed). If so, how would I replace with a new one given where I am at this stage?

Thanks...

 

[thelonelycoder]

Looks like you have a resolver problem. Somehow Dnsmasq or your ISP cannot reliably resolve fwupdate.asuswrt-merlin.net or diversion.ch.

 

[Istvanwagon]

Thanks. So what should I do in this case to fix this?

 

[Ripshod]

Thanks. So what should I do in this case to fix this?

Under WAN settings change the DNS Servers to something like quad9 (9.9.9.11 & 149.112.112.11)(I've never had any issue with them) and try the upgrade again.
If that doesn't work then it's likely something on your network is deliberately blocking those servers.

 

[Istvanwagon]

Thanks. I got busy with the holiday this week and didn't get a chance to look at this until now. Interestingly, I am not sure if the ISP resolved some things itself, but I still have the warning on the AMTM main screen, but everything redownloaded correctly when I tried "uu" to force update AMTM.

Should I try to downgrade AMTM to a lower version or do I need to do something else to fix this hash issue? Or does it really even matter? Thanks!

 

[thelonelycoder]

Thanks. I got busy with the holiday this week and didn't get a chance to look at this until now. Interestingly, I am not sure if the ISP resolved some things itself, but I still have the warning on the AMTM main screen, but everything redownloaded correctly when I tried "uu" to force update AMTM.

Should I try to downgrade AMTM to a lower version or do I need to do something else to fix this hash issue? Or does it really even matter? Thanks!

Run this command, you have stale file that is not automatically removed since there is no newer version of amtm available at this time.

rm /jffs/addons/amtm/availUpd.txt

 

[Istvanwagon]

Thanks -- that did the trick!

 

[Istvanwagon]

Hmmmm, looks like I popped the champagne too early. I ran the availUpd command above and everything worked at least initially. Now, AMTM does not show the MD5 mismatch, but now it seems the new SSD USB Drive is not being mounted upon router restart when I log into to the router GUI. Also, under AMTM, Diversion is also not showing in the app list and getting an error that Entware is not available (probably not seeing the swap file), but other apps are fine.

I also note that after I check for new updates in AMTM (option u) that FlexQOS then says "No MD5" next to it.

Also, when I run the disk check log, I get a notice that shows the disk is write protected!

Any other thoughts here on how to clear this issue? Thanks!

 

[dave14305]

FlexQOS then says "No MD5" next to it.

That's by design for FlexQoS. Only an actual version change will trigger an update, not a checksum difference.

 

[Istvanwagon]

That's by design for FlexQoS. Only an actual version change will trigger an update, not a checksum difference.

Thanks -- glad that's not an issue.

But the USB Drive is still showing unmounted when I boot up and I am getting this write error. How can this be since it is a new Sandisk SSD drive that I formatted in the router? Should I reformat again, if I can? Should I reformat outside of the router?

 

[ColinTaylor]

What is the model# & capacity of the Sandisk SSD drive?

 

[Istvanwagon]

SanDisk UltraFit 128GB 3.2 Gen 1 (400 MB/s)

 

[ColinTaylor]

SanDisk UltraFit 128GB 3.2 Gen 1 (400 MB/s)

That's a flash drive not an SSD as you previously said. I suspected that was the case because from personal experience when those Sandisk drives fail they go into read-only mode exactly like you've described.

I stopped using Sandisk flash drives after I had two in a row that failed almost immediately in that way.

You can confirm whether this is the case by plugging it back into your PC and seeing if you can format it.

 

[Istvanwagon]

That's a flash drive not an SSD as you previously said. I suspected that was the case because from personal experience when those Sandisk drives fail they go into read-only mode exactly like you've described.

I stopped using Sandisk flash drives after I had two in a row that failed almost immediately in that way.

You can confirm whether this is the case by plugging it back into your PC and seeing if you can format it.

Thanks - you were spot on again! Yes, this is a USB SSD flash drive. Checked it out on another PC and indeed it was write protected. Could not believe it as it is only like 2 weeks old! I thought I saw this Sandisk model as a recommended drive in another thread. Anyway, that's going back to Amazon...

I substituted in a SSK 128GB Dual USB C flash drive, 2-in-1, Type C+ USB-A 3.2 Gen2 SSD thumb drive instead. Any concern with this model?

I formatted it and reinstalled Entware and Diversion, no problem.

HOWEVER, now I'm having problems with Skynet. It's telling me there is a lock file, and it immediately exits. I try to open it again, and then I get a timing out error and then an instruction to change the USB location by running a script "sh /jffs/scripts/firewall install". I do that and reboot, and when I open AMTM, it appears fine. But then I open SkyNet again from the AMTM menu, and it tells me there is a lock file and kicks me out again. I am in an endless loop with Skynet now between these two screens. See screen shots below.

I think what might be happening is the I renamed the USB Drive. Can I reset the location for Skynet to look for the file or should I just re-nuke the USB Drive and name it what the old one was?

Thanks...