SomeWhereOverTheRainBow
Part of the Furniture
@Viktor Jaep
I've already reverted from using that, other issues surfaced and May 4th was more than a week ago so suspect any Star Wars effect has worn off ...
Observations from fiddling with it today ...
(1)
Using:-
Code:(sleep 30 && /jffs/scripts/vpnmon-r2.sh -screen) & # vpnmon-r2
in post-mount as suggested by @SomeWhereOverTheRainBow seems to work just as well / identically to my original method of using:-
Code:/jffs/scripts/vpnmon-r2.sh -screen & # vpnmon-r2
with a "sleep 30" added in as the first line of vpnmon-r2.sh, which is to be expected as they SHOULD be equivalent?
HOWEVER confirmed that using your built-in Startup Delay parameter (set to 30) DOES NOT give the same result at present - other AMTM scripts "fail to launch" properly
(2)
Although I said before that the revised Beta 4 was happily detecting WAN Down and WAN Up events and restarting the monitoring, upon further testing it only seem to do it ONCE, that is the first time a WAN Down/Up event occurs after a reboot and my auto-run (called from post-mount)!
The second time I simulate a WAN Down by powering off my cable modem, vpnmon-r2.sh never gets to the "red" screen telling you to reconnect/reboot your modem, no matter how long I wait. I've tried this a couple of times from cold boots of the RT-AX86U just to double-check and appears to be repeatable! Mystified by this one. Can you duplicate my findings or am I going crazy (again)?
(3)
I also note an error message as follows on the "first" monitor cycle iteration after the re-detect of the "WAN Up"
Code:grep: bad regex '\b(*error*|Undefined)\b': Invalid preceding regular expression
Also see screenshot:-
View attachment 41295
Not sure if that is anything to do with anything, on the next monitor "loop" it doesn't appear again and all seems to work?
I also don't know if it is has anything with my point (2) above, but I guess it could be related?
Yea sometimes you will see that if the regular expression doesn't find a match with the string. The hope was that the q extension would always be quiet in this regard, I guess not.