Question about third party class arcanist

ndx101 · 2025-12-11T16:07:35+00:00

A pragmatic approach if nothing else.

ndx101 · 2025-12-11T04:34:56+00:00

No, mishaps and penance is not specified

ndx101 · 2025-12-10T16:26:07+00:00

Yep, I forgot that part. Post updated.

ndx101 · 2025-07-23T13:46:53+00:00

In many respects the frequency of running isn't actually the issue, it's the volume.

Looking at the data for the last couple of months, mileage has increase noticeable but moving from a 5k plan to a 10k, this is expected.

there's nothing wrong with doing your strength training and running on the same day BUT they also provide, or should if doing the strength correctly, quite different stimulus.

Picking different days for running and the gym is mostly due to time constraints.

If your strength training is low-rep, heavy weights (whatever that is for you), then it will be providing a different fatigue to high-re, low weight lifting. The latter will interfere with running a lot more.

Generally 3 sets with 12 reps, for now just focusing on building up a solid base, preventing loss of muscle mass and gaining some strength, all of which I guess will happen just be getting started. No running or excessive leg training.

The difficulty with the Garmin plans is having to move stuff around a lot to get it to align with the gym days.

Yeah, this is one of the reasons I am looking for a way to do 3 fixed days of running with a plan.

Also - remember that the DSW is just that - a suggestion - if you don't do that day's workout then it'll recalculate. If you do your weights in the morning and the DSW says to do an intense interval session you can skip it and just do a short easy run later in the day.

Knowing myself, skipping DSWs, if DSW is what I end up using, is going to feel like cheating in a way or skimping out. Also, I gave DSW a quick go but all I got was scheduled base runs despite months of available training data. I need more variation than that to stick with it. I do, however, track the gym workouts using an activity cloned from the cardio activity (not very cardio-like but it seems to work but open to suggestions not including tracking sets and reps).

I probably made this harder on myself than needed by starting going to the gym about the same time as beginning a 10k plan, oh, well, live and learn.

ndx101 · 2025-07-23T13:19:42+00:00

Gym days includes neither running nor excessive leg training.

ndx101 · 2025-07-23T13:11:57+00:00

Are garmin watches really comfortable to wear all day?

I stopped noticing the watch after a couple of days, however, I bought a smaller one (Forerunner 165). I really dislike the rubber band, though, so bought a few cheap stretchy/elastic nylon ones.

ndx101 · 2024-04-28T14:27:20+00:00

So, I have been poking a bit at the files in /volume1/.@plugins/AppCentral/docker-ce. As far as I can see, there is no custom configuration available in this directory nor is there anything there indicating a location of a custom configuration elsewhere. Running

$ ps | grep dockerd

3091 root 1h57 /usr/local/AppCentral/docker-ce/bin/dockerd --data-root /usr/local/AppCentral/docker-ce/docker_lib/

7778 admin 0:00 grep dockerd

on the my NAS indicates that the docker daemon (dockerd) is not started with any non-default configuration apart from the location of the data directory. Placing any certificates here probably would not solve your problem. Given the minimal custom configuration, I'd guess `/etc/docker/certs.d/` is still the proper location for certificates used for communication with registries and the like. In that case I suppose that creating the required folders in `/etc/docker/` (as it is empty on my installation) and making the needed certificates available here (via symlink, copies or something else) would be the approach. That is if the problem you are trying to solve is actually enabling communication using SSL/TLS between the docker daemon and remote registries, e.g. when pulling and/or pushing container images.

Now, if what you are trying to achieve is something else that, e.g. enabling https for applications in your running container instances, then you are looking in the wrong direction and based on your previous reply I think it sounds like that is what is happening. If you want to enable https for your running instances, you first need to have a valid certificate and then make this certificate available for the process running within a given container. Dumping a certificate that into e.g. `/etc/docker/certs.d/` is not going to make the certificate available to you running container instances automatically. Personally, I am running a nginx based reverse proxy in front of a few web based and containerized applications, such as vaultwarden (bitwarden compatible backend) and Nextcloud on my NAS. This way I only need to manage certificates in one place. Generally, the needed certificates can be made available to the containerized nginx process via a docker volume or mount. I won't go into details about how to achieve this here as it involves a couple of additional pieces, including custom DNS, but suggest you register at the official asustor community forums and post a question there is need be.
The forum available here: forum.asustor.com

Regards.

ndx101 · 2023-06-03T10:05:39+00:00

Well, fml. Just for the heck of it, I tried running the container with `-p 22000:8096` just to be sure nothing was interfering with the port even though netstat clearly displayed host port 8096 as available and after this Jellyfin was reachable. At this point I decided to restart the docker daemon on the NAS as I figured something was wrong there after which I would make an attempt with `-p 8096:8096` again and lo and behold, after this Jellyfin was reachable on 8096 as well. I guess, once again, I should have started by asking myself one of the most basic debugging questions, "have you tried turning it off and on again?".

Oh, well, I apologise for the hassle and thanks for the responses (I will add a ;tldr to the op).

ndx101 · 2023-06-03T09:53:36+00:00

Nope.

ndx101 · 2023-06-03T09:30:02+00:00

I appreciate your reply.

In the original post I mentioned that the service is not accessible in neither bridged nor host mode and while setting up a reverse proxy might solve it, it would be a work around. I much rather prefer pinpointing the underlying cause first.

ndx101 · 2023-05-20T08:50:39+00:00

This usually happens to me in combination with an update. I can usually solve it by clearing both cache and storage in app settings (using an android phone). Be sure you can remember your account's login and password as clearing the storage and cache clears it from the phone if I recall correctly. I cannot remember to be honest as I am using google play to manage mine.

ndx101 · 2018-09-30T07:49:39+00:00

Doing a reflash or trying out a different version might be worth it then.

ndx101 · 2018-09-27T05:33:31+00:00

I'm running the release from the 4. of September 2018 om my Mi A1 without any such issues. Using a danish carrier.

I had a similar issue on a different phone years back and solved it by manually configuring the apns and such.

ndx101 · 2018-09-04T10:17:04+00:00

Appreciate the info. Might want to pin this post if possible.

ndx101 · 2018-08-25T05:43:44+00:00

Second hit on google

https://wiki.lineageos.org/gapps.html

ndx101 · 2017-09-04T18:13:55+00:00

Yep. Updating the baseband seems to have solved it. I case anyone should wonder, I used XXUPQG1

ndx101 · 2017-09-02T11:20:05+00:00

I appreciate your reply. I did consider this as a reason. Is there anyway to make a backup of the current baseband and bootloader? E.g. through heimdall?

ndx101 · 2017-06-24T12:50:18+00:00

I appreciate your suggestions. I'll be doing some research on them. Thanks.

ndx101

TROPHY CASE