Email WD and tell them you want Netflix + 3TB hdd

[mcmanuf]

Hello everyone.

b-rad specifically told in the FW 0.5.1.1 to email WD and tell them we want a newer fff file containing netflix and 3TB hdd support.

** WDLXTV-PLUS DOES NOT SUPPORT 3TB HDD'S!!!! Tell WD you want this fixed (with netflix too)!!!
**** The GPL wdtvlive2.fff is 6mo old and lacks support for 3TB hdd's + it deletes netflix keys!
**** Email WD and tell them you want Netflix + WDLXTV + 3TB hdd support

Inspired from RMerlin, this could be included in the letter to them:

I want to run your latest GPL 1.06.16 firmware on my WDTV Live Plus. However the GPL archive is still using an older kernel that does not support my 3 TB USB hard disk. Please update the kernel version in your GPL archive to match the official firmware release.

This will hopefully make it across level 1 support and into level 2 support to the engineering department!

I believe it does make a difference if we are many people that write to WD support in order for them to fix this. And frankly its unfair that we get this old kernel, when they with very simple means can update it to the newest kernel!

The WD supprt homepage is:
http://support.wdc.com/contact/index.asp?lang=en

[RMerlin]

You should have specified you are talking about the GPL version of their kernel. The .fff file that ships in the actual update has Netflix and 3 TB support, but it can't be used with third party firmwares. The problem is with their GPL kernel, that they haven't updated (read: recompiled) in a long time.

[mcmanuf]

You are absolutely right. An honest mistake for my part.
I have corrected my query to the customer representative, and made it more clear.

Has anyone else sent them an email and what was their response?

[mcmanuf]

This is from another thread in here!

Subject: 0.5.1.1 release

after contacting Western Digital they sent me the .fff file but it is for 1.06.16_B. Can i use this .fff file with the 0.5.1.1. fw? sorry i am new to all of this.

Sounds quite interesting. Do anyone know if that specific file could be of any use?

[mad_ady]

No, the original fff file that comes from WD contains their signed kernel which can only boot an official (e.g. signed) firmware. According to the GPL they have to release the sources of the GPL software they use, for others to modify. This includes the kernel.
Now, WD has released sources for the older kernel that can be used to compile a kernel, but this kernel won't boot since it's not signed by WD's keys (this is why we can't change the kernel and can only add some modules).

As far as I know (this is the part where I may be wrong), WD used to release a compiled kernel without the firmware signature check that can be used to boot the WDLXTV firmware. What I don't know is if WD used to release a fff that was used to boot previous firmwares (without the firmware signature check), and if they are forced by the GPL to release this as well (GPL forces you to release the source, not a custom build of the source).

So, until somebody more knowledgeable corrects me on this, everybody should be asking for a fff that can boot an unsigned firmware. The original fff can't do that.

[mcmanuf]

So is it correctly understood that we need and unsigned *.fff file for firmware 1.05.04_B ? Couldn't the file that sdotech01 got from WD fullfill our needs?
I do say say I find it quite confusing exactly how everything works together. Especially if you are not a part of the dev team, or spend alot of time in the forums!

Maybe a knowledgeable person in this forum can help form an exact and precise email that can be sended to WD support. Stating such things as GPL violations and stating the exact problem we as costumers are facing. That way the emails cannot be understood, and we prevent sending unclear and unprecise emails to WD!

I strongly believe in a joint effort!

[mad_ady]

I agree. Personally I haven't touched the kernel myself, so I can't build a coherent message. What I know I learned from talking to b-rad, but I'm sure I missed some steps or misunderstood something, because my pieces of the puzzle don't fit together perfectly

[sdotech01]

This is the email that i received from WD. All they told me was to update to the latest firmware and then i should have 3TB support but if i update my FW to the latest 1.06.16_B, i will lose my moviesheets correct? Also, this may be a stupid question but is there 3TB support on the Live and just not the Live Plus? Sorry if that was a stupid question.

Thank you for contacting Western Digital Customer Service and Support. My name is *******.

I will be more than happy to assist you.

In this case I suggest you to update the firmware of your unit to the latest version available, you will be able to find a link that will guide through the steps on updating. Once you update Netflix will appear as a online service on the unit and it will support 3TB drives.

For more information on downloading the firmware, please click below:

Answer Title: How to update the firmware on a WD TV Live HD Media Player or WD TV Live Plus HD Media Player
Answer Link: http://wdc.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/5343

If you have any further questions, please reply to this email and we will be happy to assist you further.

Sincerely,
********
Western Digital Service and Support
http://support.wdc.com

[RMerlin]

If you email their tech support asking for 3TB support, they will simply tell you to update to 1.06.xx. That isn't the issue at hand.

What people should ask them is to update the kernel provided in their GPL archive so it will support 3TB drives. They are still distributing the GPL archive with an older kernel that does not support 3 TB HDDs.

[RMerlin]

To people unsure what to ask exactly, here's an example on how I would formulate the request:

I want to run your latest GPL 1.06.16 firmware on my WDTV Live Plus. However the GPL archive is still using an older kernel that does not support my 3 TB USB hard disk. Please update the kernel version in your GPL archive to match the official firmware release.

No need to mention which firmware you are using (or else they could just say "not supported, you're on your own". This points out that you are running code provided by WD, and that their code (specifically the GPL archive) is in need of updating. And there's not enough loose ends for a Level 1 tech support to grasp at, and simply answer you with a pre-canned response like some of you already had The goal is to get that request passed on to Level 2, which will stand a better chance of seeing it passed along to engineering.