DXP4800+ and Debian Updates: Has anyone tried apt upgrade? Plus, Remote Monitoring tips.

Hi everyone,

I’m currently exploring the capabilities of my Ugreen DXP4800+. As many of you know, the system is based on Debian 12 (Bookworm).

Upon checking via SSH, I noticed that there are currently about 170 packages pending for update. I am very tempted to run a dist-upgrade, but I’m concerned about how this might affect the proprietary UGOS layer or the system’s stability.

Has anyone here dared to perform a full apt upgrade or dist-upgrade on this specific model? If so, did it break any core functionalities (like the web UI or RAID management)?

On another note: Remote Monitoring. Since SNMP is not natively implemented in the DXP series yet, I decided to install Zabbix Agent 2 (the standard Debian version) to keep an eye on the system’s health. It seems to be working fine so far, but I’d love to hear from the community:

  1. Does anyone have experience monitoring their NAS using third-party agents?

  2. Have you found any alternative methods to get system metrics without SNMP?

Looking forward to hearing your experiences and advice!

Best regards
H

From what I’ve seen, Ugreen has stated this might break things.

Their support team can create a recovery image for you though, or you could dry cloning the OS drive to a different SSD and see how that works and run the upgrade on that. Just note that Ugreen currently doesn’t have a solution for moving drives, so if you install a recovery image, you’re starting from fresh and you will be asked for format your hard drives.

1 Like

Unfortunately, before receiving this advice, I attempted to install Zabbix Agent 2 for Debian 12 directly on the host. This caused a dependency conflict with the package libopengl0:amd64 1.7.0-2101~22.04. I was only able to recover the package by manually installing the Debian version libopengl0:amd64 1.6.0-1. So far, the system appears to remain stable.

In hindsight, since Docker is officially supported, I realize I should have deployed the agent as a container rather than installing it on the host filesystem. This would have provided the necessary monitoring without risking the integrity of the base system.

I hope this thread serves as a record for others: the best and most prudent practice for monitoring is to use containers, ensuring both system stability and the insights we need.

Thank you again for your guidance!

Hi everyone,

I finally found some time to give “some love” to my NAS. After a bit of trial and error with the native OS (and a few broken packages that nearly gave me a heart attack!), I decided to go the Docker route to keep the base system clean.

I installed the Docker app, and it’s the perfect environment to deploy Zabbix Agent 2. It’s running smoothly and monitoring everything I need without messing with the NAS firmware.

For those interested, here is the Docker Compose file that worked perfectly for me:

services:
zabbix-agent2:
image: zabbix/zabbix-agent2:latest
container_name: zabbix-agent2
privileged: true # Important for the agent to access hardware metrics
network_mode: host # Recommended to report the real NAS IP instead of the Docker bridge IP
environment:

  • ZBX_SERVER_HOST=192.168.xx.xx
  • ZBX_SERVER_ACTIVE=192.168.xx.xx
  • ZBX_HOSTNAME=nas.local
  • ZBX_LOGREMOTECOMMANDS=1
  • ZBX_ALLOWKEY=system.run[*]
  • TZ=America/Argentina/Buenos_Aires
    volumes:
  • /var/run/docker.sock:/var/run/docker.sock:ro
  • /proc:/host/proc:ro # Added for system CPU/RAM metrics
  • /sys:/host/sys:ro # Added for hardware metrics
  • /:/host/rootfs:ro # Added to monitor disk space of Shared Folders
    restart: always

Hope this helps anyone looking to monitor their Ugreen NAS!

1 Like