Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pages: [1]
1
Updates / Re: CWP 1.7 – What has actually been fixed? Community feedback
« on: August 10, 2026, 11:37:24 AM »
I think there is another aspect worth adding to this discussion, because my experience with CWP support over the last few months has made me even more concerned about the current situation.
After the changes that affected the UI on a significant number of servers, I expected at least a proper technical explanation from CWP. When an update affects core administrative functions on production systems, users need to know what actually happened, what was changed, what is still affected, and whether there are any recommended workarounds.
Instead, after opening support tickets and asking very specific questions, the answers have essentially been: please be patient, everything will be fixed in the next update.
But that does not actually answer the questions.
I have also contacted the development/support team by email at least three times regarding technical issues. These were not complaints or emotional messages; they were specific technical questions that, in my opinion, should have been relatively straightforward for the development team to address. I never received a meaningful response.
This is becoming more concerning than the individual bugs themselves.
Bugs can happen. Regressions can happen, especially when introducing a major UI or architectural change. What matters is how a company handles them afterwards.
If a production control panel breaks part of its administrative interface, I would expect at least:
* a clear explanation of what caused the problem;
* proper technical documentation;
* a list of known affected components;
* a clear indication of what has actually been fixed;
* information about remaining known issues;
* and, most importantly, some indication of whether a given release is considered safe for production.
Instead, users are increasingly being asked to simply wait for the next update without being given enough information to make an informed decision.
For me, this is directly connected to the question I raised in my original post:
**Can I safely update my production servers?**
At the moment, the answer is still unclear.
And this is particularly frustrating because I have been using CWP for many years. I did not choose CWP because I wanted a managed service. I chose it because it gave me a practical way to manage my own servers while retaining control over the underlying system.
I would genuinely prefer to see CWP recover from this situation rather than migrate to another panel. After so many years, migrating multiple production servers is not something I would do simply because of a few bugs.
But there is a point where the lack of communication becomes a technical risk in itself.
If I cannot get a clear answer about what an update changes, what has been tested, which issues are known, and whether the release is safe for production, then eventually I have to consider whether continuing to run CWP is the responsible choice.
So I would actually like to ask the CWP team something very simple:
**What is the current official position regarding CWP 1.x stability?**
Is CWP 1.7 considered production-ready for existing installations?
If so, which of the major UI regressions reported by users have actually been fixed, and where is the technical documentation describing those fixes?
And if it is not yet considered fully stable, why isn't this being communicated clearly to administrators before they update production servers?
I think these are reasonable questions, and answering them openly would probably do much more to restore confidence in CWP than simply telling users to wait for the next update.
I still hope CWP gets back to the level of stability and reliability that made many of us choose it in the first place. But at this point, we need more than promises about the next update. We need information.
And I want to be clear about one final point: **if this transparency, communication, and technical documentation do not improve, then migration will eventually become a concrete necessity rather than simply an option.**
I would genuinely prefer not to go down that road after using CWP for so many years. But running production servers requires a reasonable level of confidence in the platform and in the ability to understand and manage changes safely.
If that confidence cannot be restored through clear answers and concrete technical information, then we will have to seriously consider migrating our servers to another solution.
After the changes that affected the UI on a significant number of servers, I expected at least a proper technical explanation from CWP. When an update affects core administrative functions on production systems, users need to know what actually happened, what was changed, what is still affected, and whether there are any recommended workarounds.
Instead, after opening support tickets and asking very specific questions, the answers have essentially been: please be patient, everything will be fixed in the next update.
But that does not actually answer the questions.
I have also contacted the development/support team by email at least three times regarding technical issues. These were not complaints or emotional messages; they were specific technical questions that, in my opinion, should have been relatively straightforward for the development team to address. I never received a meaningful response.
This is becoming more concerning than the individual bugs themselves.
Bugs can happen. Regressions can happen, especially when introducing a major UI or architectural change. What matters is how a company handles them afterwards.
If a production control panel breaks part of its administrative interface, I would expect at least:
* a clear explanation of what caused the problem;
* proper technical documentation;
* a list of known affected components;
* a clear indication of what has actually been fixed;
* information about remaining known issues;
* and, most importantly, some indication of whether a given release is considered safe for production.
Instead, users are increasingly being asked to simply wait for the next update without being given enough information to make an informed decision.
For me, this is directly connected to the question I raised in my original post:
**Can I safely update my production servers?**
At the moment, the answer is still unclear.
And this is particularly frustrating because I have been using CWP for many years. I did not choose CWP because I wanted a managed service. I chose it because it gave me a practical way to manage my own servers while retaining control over the underlying system.
I would genuinely prefer to see CWP recover from this situation rather than migrate to another panel. After so many years, migrating multiple production servers is not something I would do simply because of a few bugs.
But there is a point where the lack of communication becomes a technical risk in itself.
If I cannot get a clear answer about what an update changes, what has been tested, which issues are known, and whether the release is safe for production, then eventually I have to consider whether continuing to run CWP is the responsible choice.
So I would actually like to ask the CWP team something very simple:
**What is the current official position regarding CWP 1.x stability?**
Is CWP 1.7 considered production-ready for existing installations?
If so, which of the major UI regressions reported by users have actually been fixed, and where is the technical documentation describing those fixes?
And if it is not yet considered fully stable, why isn't this being communicated clearly to administrators before they update production servers?
I think these are reasonable questions, and answering them openly would probably do much more to restore confidence in CWP than simply telling users to wait for the next update.
I still hope CWP gets back to the level of stability and reliability that made many of us choose it in the first place. But at this point, we need more than promises about the next update. We need information.
And I want to be clear about one final point: **if this transparency, communication, and technical documentation do not improve, then migration will eventually become a concrete necessity rather than simply an option.**
I would genuinely prefer not to go down that road after using CWP for so many years. But running production servers requires a reasonable level of confidence in the platform and in the ability to understand and manage changes safely.
If that confidence cannot be restored through clear answers and concrete technical information, then we will have to seriously consider migrating our servers to another solution.
2
Updates / Re: CWP 1.7 – What has actually been fixed? Community feedback
« on: August 09, 2026, 08:45:34 PM »
At this point, I think we also need to be realistic about the situation.
If these issues are not properly resolved and the CWP panel does not return to a stable and reliable state, I don't see many alternatives other than migrating to another control panel.
I have been using CWP because it was a practical and relatively stable solution for managing my servers. I would prefer to stay with CWP, but I also need to be able to trust the management interface on production systems.
The underlying services may still be running, but if the UI cannot be trusted for everyday administration, sooner or later migration becomes the only realistic option.
I hope the CWP team understands that this is not about refusing to accept bugs in a new release. The concern is that the current situation has been going on for too long, with multiple regressions being reported and very little communication about when they will be fixed.
I would much rather see CWP get these issues properly resolved and return to the level of stability we had before than have to migrate to another solution.
But if the panel cannot become reliable again, then unfortunately migration will be the logical next step.
If these issues are not properly resolved and the CWP panel does not return to a stable and reliable state, I don't see many alternatives other than migrating to another control panel.
I have been using CWP because it was a practical and relatively stable solution for managing my servers. I would prefer to stay with CWP, but I also need to be able to trust the management interface on production systems.
The underlying services may still be running, but if the UI cannot be trusted for everyday administration, sooner or later migration becomes the only realistic option.
I hope the CWP team understands that this is not about refusing to accept bugs in a new release. The concern is that the current situation has been going on for too long, with multiple regressions being reported and very little communication about when they will be fixed.
I would much rather see CWP get these issues properly resolved and return to the level of stability we had before than have to migrate to another solution.
But if the panel cannot become reliable again, then unfortunately migration will be the logical next step.
3
Updates / Re: CWP 1.7 – What has actually been fixed? Community feedback
« on: August 08, 2026, 02:14:12 AM »
Thanks for sharing your experience. This is exactly the kind of feedback I was hoping to get with this thread.
For me, the main issue is not whether a particular bug can eventually be fixed. The bigger problem is that, as a CWP user, I need to be able to trust the software I install on a production server.
I don't want a managed service, and I'm not asking CWP to manage my server for me. I chose a control panel because I want to administer the server myself, with a reliable UI and predictable behavior.
If something breaks, I can use the CLI and fix it myself. That's not the point. If I have to increasingly bypass the panel and work directly from the command line because I cannot trust what the next CWP update might change, then I have to seriously question what value the panel is providing.
The biggest problem right now is that I simply don't have enough information to make a safe decision about updating.
It is difficult to understand:
* which problems have actually been fixed;
* which problems are still known;
* which fixes may have introduced regressions;
* what has been tested before release;
* and whether an update is considered safe for production.
The changelog alone doesn't give me enough confidence to answer a very simple question:
**“Can I safely update my production server now?”**
At the moment, I don't know the answer to that question — and that is precisely what prevents me from updating.
I've already disabled silent updates on my production servers because I need to be the one deciding when an update is applied, after making sure my data is protected and the release is safe enough for my environment.
I don't expect CWP to be perfect. Bugs happen.
What I do expect is transparency, predictable updates, and enough technical information to make an informed decision as a system administrator.
If I install CWP, I want a control panel I can trust — not a managed service, and not a system where I have to guess whether the next update will break something.
For me, the main issue is not whether a particular bug can eventually be fixed. The bigger problem is that, as a CWP user, I need to be able to trust the software I install on a production server.
I don't want a managed service, and I'm not asking CWP to manage my server for me. I chose a control panel because I want to administer the server myself, with a reliable UI and predictable behavior.
If something breaks, I can use the CLI and fix it myself. That's not the point. If I have to increasingly bypass the panel and work directly from the command line because I cannot trust what the next CWP update might change, then I have to seriously question what value the panel is providing.
The biggest problem right now is that I simply don't have enough information to make a safe decision about updating.
It is difficult to understand:
* which problems have actually been fixed;
* which problems are still known;
* which fixes may have introduced regressions;
* what has been tested before release;
* and whether an update is considered safe for production.
The changelog alone doesn't give me enough confidence to answer a very simple question:
**“Can I safely update my production server now?”**
At the moment, I don't know the answer to that question — and that is precisely what prevents me from updating.
I've already disabled silent updates on my production servers because I need to be the one deciding when an update is applied, after making sure my data is protected and the release is safe enough for my environment.
I don't expect CWP to be perfect. Bugs happen.
What I do expect is transparency, predictable updates, and enough technical information to make an informed decision as a system administrator.
If I install CWP, I want a control panel I can trust — not a managed service, and not a system where I have to guess whether the next update will break something.
4
Updates / CWP 1.7 – What has actually been fixed? Community feedback
« on: August 06, 2026, 09:44:28 PM »
Now that we've reached CWP 1.7, I'd like to understand the current state of the platform and compare experiences with other administrators.
After the silent transition from 0.9.8.12.44 to the new 1.x series, I experienced several issues that mainly affected the new UI. Looking through the forum, it seems I was not the only one.
These are the issues I have personally encountered:
- YUM Manager inaccessible or stuck.
- ModSecurity management not working from the UI.
- Firewall management issues.
- PHP Selector not working correctly.
- New Backup module (still marked as Beta) with poor email reporting:
- notifications often don't specify whether the backup was local or remote;
- there is no clear summary of which accounts completed successfully and which failed;
- overall reporting is not sufficient for production environments.
- SSL certificate generation/management issues.
- Occasional problems with Roundcube.
The good news is that, on my servers, the backend itself has remained functional. Most operations continue to work correctly from the command line, which suggests that many of the regressions are related to the new UI rather than the underlying services.
What concerns me most is not a single bug, but the impact these updates had on production environments. A control panel used to manage production servers should prioritize stability and reliability. Releasing updates that introduce regressions into core administrative functions creates unnecessary operational risks, especially for administrators managing multiple servers.
Now that several updates have already been released and we're at version 1.7, I'd like to hear from other users.
- Which issues have actually been resolved?
- Which problems are you still experiencing?
- Is 1.7 stable enough for daily production use?
- Have you found any new regressions that haven't yet been discussed?
- Has the new Backup module become reliable, or are there still significant limitations?
I'm not interested in starting a complaint thread. My goal is to build an accurate picture of the current state of CWP 1.7 so that administrators can make informed decisions and developers can better understand which areas still need attention.
I appreciate any feedback from those running CWP in real production environments.
After the silent transition from 0.9.8.12.44 to the new 1.x series, I experienced several issues that mainly affected the new UI. Looking through the forum, it seems I was not the only one.
These are the issues I have personally encountered:
- YUM Manager inaccessible or stuck.
- ModSecurity management not working from the UI.
- Firewall management issues.
- PHP Selector not working correctly.
- New Backup module (still marked as Beta) with poor email reporting:
- notifications often don't specify whether the backup was local or remote;
- there is no clear summary of which accounts completed successfully and which failed;
- overall reporting is not sufficient for production environments.
- SSL certificate generation/management issues.
- Occasional problems with Roundcube.
The good news is that, on my servers, the backend itself has remained functional. Most operations continue to work correctly from the command line, which suggests that many of the regressions are related to the new UI rather than the underlying services.
What concerns me most is not a single bug, but the impact these updates had on production environments. A control panel used to manage production servers should prioritize stability and reliability. Releasing updates that introduce regressions into core administrative functions creates unnecessary operational risks, especially for administrators managing multiple servers.
Now that several updates have already been released and we're at version 1.7, I'd like to hear from other users.
- Which issues have actually been resolved?
- Which problems are you still experiencing?
- Is 1.7 stable enough for daily production use?
- Have you found any new regressions that haven't yet been discussed?
- Has the new Backup module become reliable, or are there still significant limitations?
I'm not interested in starting a complaint thread. My goal is to build an accurate picture of the current state of CWP 1.7 so that administrators can make informed decisions and developers can better understand which areas still need attention.
I appreciate any feedback from those running CWP in real production environments.
5
Updates / Re: CWP 1.5 / cwpsrv-1.24.0-2 update: Are GUI modules -ModSec, Firewall, Yum, New Ba
« on: July 31, 2026, 01:04:52 PM »
Thanks for the update, NAZA. I've turned off auto-updates in the meantime. Lately, we've been having continuous issues with every upgrade. Let's see if the upcoming patches resolve them. The dev team confirmed these are known issues and are being fixed. We really need a hotfix as soon as possible, as time is critical for us.
6
Updates / CWP 1.5 / cwpsrv-1.24.0-2 update: Are GUI modules -ModSec, Firewall, Yum, New Ba
« on: July 30, 2026, 10:05:52 PM »
Hello community,
I'm holding off on updating my production servers (AlmaLinux) to the latest 1.5 build (specifically around cwpsrv-1.24.0-2) due to widespread reports of GUI modules breaking.
Before I proceed, I wanted to ask if anyone has successfully updated in the last 48 hours and can confirm that the following issues are actually resolved:
1.ModSecurity Manager: Loads correctly and allows toggling rules/domains without blank pages.
2.Firewall (CSF): No longer shows a blank page or "module does not exist" errors.
3.Yum Manager: No longer stuck on "checking for updates" or returning 404 errors.
4.New Backup Module Email Reports: This is a chronic issue. Notifications are inconsistent. When they do arrive, they are vague: they don't specify if the backup was local or remote, they lack a clear success/failure status, and they often only confirm one account, leaving the status of other accounts completely unknown. Has this reporting been improved?
My current status: My backend is perfectly fine. Apache syntax is OK, services are running, and ModSecurity is actively blocking threats in the background. The issue is strictly the CWP Admin GUI failing to load these specific modules due to what seems to be a jQuery/script conflict introduced in the update.
I have Proxmox snapshots ready, but I want to avoid a rollback scenario if possible, as I have recent, specific security patches applied to WordPress installations that I don't want to lose and re-apply manually.
Has anyone seen a stable build number that definitively fixes these GUI rendering and reporting issues? Or should we still wait for an official patch?
Thanks in advance for your real-world feedback.
I'm holding off on updating my production servers (AlmaLinux) to the latest 1.5 build (specifically around cwpsrv-1.24.0-2) due to widespread reports of GUI modules breaking.
Before I proceed, I wanted to ask if anyone has successfully updated in the last 48 hours and can confirm that the following issues are actually resolved:
1.ModSecurity Manager: Loads correctly and allows toggling rules/domains without blank pages.
2.Firewall (CSF): No longer shows a blank page or "module does not exist" errors.
3.Yum Manager: No longer stuck on "checking for updates" or returning 404 errors.
4.New Backup Module Email Reports: This is a chronic issue. Notifications are inconsistent. When they do arrive, they are vague: they don't specify if the backup was local or remote, they lack a clear success/failure status, and they often only confirm one account, leaving the status of other accounts completely unknown. Has this reporting been improved?
My current status: My backend is perfectly fine. Apache syntax is OK, services are running, and ModSecurity is actively blocking threats in the background. The issue is strictly the CWP Admin GUI failing to load these specific modules due to what seems to be a jQuery/script conflict introduced in the update.
I have Proxmox snapshots ready, but I want to avoid a rollback scenario if possible, as I have recent, specific security patches applied to WordPress installations that I don't want to lose and re-apply manually.
Has anyone seen a stable build number that definitively fixes these GUI rendering and reporting issues? Or should we still wait for an official patch?
Thanks in advance for your real-world feedback.
7
Backup / Re: NEW Backup: Still in Perpetual Beta? Critical Issues Unresolved for Months (CWP7
« on: July 16, 2026, 02:17:24 AM »
I appreciate your reply, and unfortunately it seems I'm not the only one experiencing long response times from support.
For me, however, the main concern is not just the lack of replies to tickets. It is the current state of the NEW Backup module itself.
After previous forced updates, both local and remote backups were broken for quite some time. Thankfully those issues were eventually fixed, but only after many reports and a long wait.
The remaining issue is, in my opinion, just as important: backup notification emails are still unreliable. Most of the time they are not sent at all, and when they are, they contain almost no useful information. They do not specify whether the notification refers to a local or remote backup, which accounts were successfully backed up, whether any account failed, or if the backup completed with warnings or errors.
This affects both local and remote backups.
A professional backup solution should provide administrators with enough information to immediately verify the outcome of scheduled backup jobs. Instead, I still have to manually log into the server and check every backup to make sure everything completed successfully. That defeats one of the main purposes of having automated backup notifications.
What concerns me even more is that this issue has remained unresolved for months, despite being reported through official support tickets, while the forum has also received no response from the development team.
I am not posting this to criticize anyone personally. I simply hope the developers acknowledge this issue, provide some feedback, and let the community know whether it is already being worked on and when we can reasonably expect a fix.
CWP7 PRO
For me, however, the main concern is not just the lack of replies to tickets. It is the current state of the NEW Backup module itself.
After previous forced updates, both local and remote backups were broken for quite some time. Thankfully those issues were eventually fixed, but only after many reports and a long wait.
The remaining issue is, in my opinion, just as important: backup notification emails are still unreliable. Most of the time they are not sent at all, and when they are, they contain almost no useful information. They do not specify whether the notification refers to a local or remote backup, which accounts were successfully backed up, whether any account failed, or if the backup completed with warnings or errors.
This affects both local and remote backups.
A professional backup solution should provide administrators with enough information to immediately verify the outcome of scheduled backup jobs. Instead, I still have to manually log into the server and check every backup to make sure everything completed successfully. That defeats one of the main purposes of having automated backup notifications.
What concerns me even more is that this issue has remained unresolved for months, despite being reported through official support tickets, while the forum has also received no response from the development team.
I am not posting this to criticize anyone personally. I simply hope the developers acknowledge this issue, provide some feedback, and let the community know whether it is already being worked on and when we can reasonably expect a fix.
CWP7 PRO
8
Backup / NEW Backup: Still in Perpetual Beta? Critical Issues Unresolved for Months (CWP7
« on: July 13, 2026, 12:26:05 PM »
Hello everyone,
I am a CWP7 Pro user, and I would like to publicly raise an issue that I now consider unacceptable.
For months, I have been reporting problems with the NEW Backup module through the official ticket system, but I have received little to no meaningful response. My support tickets often remain unanswered for more than 15 days, which is simply not the level of support I expect from a Pro service.
The main issue is that the NEW Backup module does not send backup notification emails reliably. On the rare occasions when an email is actually sent, it does not indicate whether it refers to a local backup or a remote backup, nor does it specify which backup jobs completed successfully and which failed.
A backup system should not send a generic "backup completed" email. It should provide a detailed report that clearly identifies the backup type, destination, and the success or failure of every backup task. This is not an optional feature—it is a fundamental requirement for any professional backup solution.
Unfortunately, this is not an isolated incident. In the past, we have already experienced situations where software updates broke the backup module completely, making backups impossible to perform. These issues were caused by the software itself, not by server administrators.
At this point, I respectfully ask the development team to treat these problems as a high priority instead of leaving the NEW Backup module in what increasingly feels like a permanent beta state.
I am posting this here because the official support channel has not provided acceptable response times or meaningful updates regarding these issues. I sincerely hope this post receives the attention it deserves and that the development team can provide concrete information about when these long-standing problems will finally be resolved.
Thank you for taking the time to read this, and I would also appreciate hearing from other CWP users who may have experienced similar issues.
Best regards to everyone in the forum.
I am a CWP7 Pro user, and I would like to publicly raise an issue that I now consider unacceptable.
For months, I have been reporting problems with the NEW Backup module through the official ticket system, but I have received little to no meaningful response. My support tickets often remain unanswered for more than 15 days, which is simply not the level of support I expect from a Pro service.
The main issue is that the NEW Backup module does not send backup notification emails reliably. On the rare occasions when an email is actually sent, it does not indicate whether it refers to a local backup or a remote backup, nor does it specify which backup jobs completed successfully and which failed.
A backup system should not send a generic "backup completed" email. It should provide a detailed report that clearly identifies the backup type, destination, and the success or failure of every backup task. This is not an optional feature—it is a fundamental requirement for any professional backup solution.
Unfortunately, this is not an isolated incident. In the past, we have already experienced situations where software updates broke the backup module completely, making backups impossible to perform. These issues were caused by the software itself, not by server administrators.
At this point, I respectfully ask the development team to treat these problems as a high priority instead of leaving the NEW Backup module in what increasingly feels like a permanent beta state.
I am posting this here because the official support channel has not provided acceptable response times or meaningful updates regarding these issues. I sincerely hope this post receives the attention it deserves and that the development team can provide concrete information about when these long-standing problems will finally be resolved.
Thank you for taking the time to read this, and I would also appreciate hearing from other CWP users who may have experienced similar issues.
Best regards to everyone in the forum.
9
CentOS-WebPanel Bugs / Re: CWP's problems that need to be fixed urgently
« on: June 17, 2026, 12:20:03 PM »
I would like to know whether the developers and the CWP team intend to address these issues and continue developing and supporting the project, or whether we should start considering alternative solutions.
In addition to the current issue with local backups failing to complete successfully, there have been long-standing problems with the new Backup module. Another recurring issue concerns the backup confirmation email: when it is received, it does not indicate which backups completed successfully and which ones failed, making it difficult to verify backup integrity and status.
Please keep in mind that these servers are running in a production environment, not in a testing or laboratory setting. These are not issues that we, as server administrators, can resolve on our own; they require intervention and fixes from the CWP development team.
I would like to thank in advance anyone who can help me better understand the situation and clarify the future direction of the project.
In addition to the current issue with local backups failing to complete successfully, there have been long-standing problems with the new Backup module. Another recurring issue concerns the backup confirmation email: when it is received, it does not indicate which backups completed successfully and which ones failed, making it difficult to verify backup integrity and status.
Please keep in mind that these servers are running in a production environment, not in a testing or laboratory setting. These are not issues that we, as server administrators, can resolve on our own; they require intervention and fixes from the CWP development team.
I would like to thank in advance anyone who can help me better understand the situation and clarify the future direction of the project.
10
Backup / Re: Critical Backup Bug After Latest Update (new backup)
« on: June 17, 2026, 12:21:44 AM »
I would also like to report an issue with the email notification that is supposed to confirm whether the backup has completed successfully.
The email does not always arrive, and when it does, it does not specify whether all accounts and websites were backed up successfully. It also does not clearly indicate whether the entire backup process completed without errors or which accounts, if any, failed to be backed up.
The email does not always arrive, and when it does, it does not specify whether all accounts and websites were backed up successfully. It also does not clearly indicate whether the entire backup process completed without errors or which accounts, if any, failed to be backed up.
11
Backup / Re: Critical Backup Bug After Latest Update (new backup)
« on: June 16, 2026, 12:49:50 PM »
(New Backup beta)
I confirm that, as of June 16, 2026, the issue still persists and local backups continue to fail for the reasons we have already explained. Please note that this issue affects only local backups and does not affect remote backups.
As administrators, we cannot directly resolve this bug, as it requires a code fix by the developers. We therefore request that the issue be addressed as soon as possible.
We would like to remind you that these servers are running in a production environment and that the proper functioning of local backups is one of the most important aspects of system security and reliability.
Thank you for your attention.
I confirm that, as of June 16, 2026, the issue still persists and local backups continue to fail for the reasons we have already explained. Please note that this issue affects only local backups and does not affect remote backups.
As administrators, we cannot directly resolve this bug, as it requires a code fix by the developers. We therefore request that the issue be addressed as soon as possible.
We would like to remind you that these servers are running in a production environment and that the proper functioning of local backups is one of the most important aspects of system security and reliability.
Thank you for your attention.
12
Backup / Critical Backup Bug After Latest Update (new backup)
« on: June 13, 2026, 10:28:05 PM »
Since the latest backup update, local backups are broken.
Backup archives are created in the temporary directory but never moved to the final backup location.
The system reports "Backup Finished" even though the process is incomplete and files remain in the temp folder.
Email notifications are also unreliable and often contain no useful information about successful or failed accounts.
This is affecting production servers and leaving systems without reliable automated backups for days.
Multiple support tickets have received no response.
Please escalate this issue to the developers urgently.
Backup archives are created in the temporary directory but never moved to the final backup location.
The system reports "Backup Finished" even though the process is incomplete and files remain in the temp folder.
Email notifications are also unreliable and often contain no useful information about successful or failed accounts.
This is affecting production servers and leaving systems without reliable automated backups for days.
Multiple support tickets have received no response.
Please escalate this issue to the developers urgently.
Pages: [1]
