[GH-ISSUE #503] Epaperlink update to 2.82 does not update filesystem #2529

Closed
opened 2026-03-20 21:07:23 +01:00 by sascha_hemi · 5 comments
Owner

Originally created by @jum0n on GitHub (Sep 14, 2025).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/OpenEPaperLink/OpenEPaperLink/issues/503

Describe the bug
Filesystem shows 2.81 instead of 2.82 when doing full update and also if individual update

To Reproduce
Steps to reproduce the behavior:

  1. Update and reboot access point
  2. Check esp32 and filesystem version should match

Expected behavior
Filesystem should update to version 2.82

Screenshots
current env: ESP32_S3_16_8_YELLOW_AP
build date: 2025-09-12 11:39
esp32 version: 2.82
filesystem version: 2.81
psram size: 8383655
flash size: 16777216
ESP32-C6 version: 0019

Additional context
Add any other context about the problem here.

Originally created by @jum0n on GitHub (Sep 14, 2025). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/OpenEPaperLink/OpenEPaperLink/issues/503 **Describe the bug** Filesystem shows 2.81 instead of 2.82 when doing full update and also if individual update **To Reproduce** Steps to reproduce the behavior: 1. Update and reboot access point 2. Check esp32 and filesystem version should match **Expected behavior** Filesystem should update to version 2.82 **Screenshots** current env: ESP32_S3_16_8_YELLOW_AP build date: 2025-09-12 11:39 esp32 version: 2.82 filesystem version: 2.81 psram size: 8383655 flash size: 16777216 ESP32-C6 version: 0019 -------------------------- **Additional context** Add any other context about the problem here.
sascha_hemi added the bug label 2026-03-20 21:07:23 +01:00
Author
Owner

@kvandt commented on GitHub (Sep 16, 2025):

Can confirm. Same her on Mini AP V4.

<!-- gh-comment-id:3299266919 --> @kvandt commented on GitHub (Sep 16, 2025): Can confirm. Same her on Mini AP V4.
Author
Owner

@jurasjo commented on GitHub (Sep 17, 2025):

Have you cleared the cache in the browser?

<!-- gh-comment-id:3304170862 --> @jurasjo commented on GitHub (Sep 17, 2025): Have you cleared the cache in the browser?
Author
Owner

@kvandt commented on GitHub (Sep 17, 2025):

Yes, did multiple times. The ESP32 version was correct in the overview after updating. But strangely enough it is now correct after several power cycles of the AP. Must be some caching issue somewhere.

<!-- gh-comment-id:3304181196 --> @kvandt commented on GitHub (Sep 17, 2025): Yes, did multiple times. The ESP32 version was correct in the overview after updating. But strangely enough it is now correct after several power cycles of the AP. Must be some caching issue somewhere.
Author
Owner

@saschaludwig commented on GitHub (Sep 18, 2025):

That is definitely a browser issue, I have the same issue that the fs version shows 2.81 in my default browser.
In another browser that has never seen the AP, the fs version is displayed correctly.
In my default browser, an incognito window does also show the correct version 2.82.
I fixed this with removing tag_db and tag_types from the browser's local store without rebooting the AP.

As far as I can see, the value gets either cached from /version.txt or /sysinfo so force reloading those URLs could also fix the "issue".

<!-- gh-comment-id:3309814625 --> @saschaludwig commented on GitHub (Sep 18, 2025): That is definitely a browser issue, I have the same issue that the fs version shows 2.81 in my default browser. In another browser that has never seen the AP, the fs version is displayed correctly. In my default browser, an incognito window does also show the correct version 2.82. I fixed this with removing tag_db and tag_types from the browser's local store without rebooting the AP. As far as I can see, the value gets either cached from `/version.txt` or `/sysinfo` so force reloading those URLs could also fix the "issue".
Author
Owner

@jum0n commented on GitHub (Oct 3, 2025):

But strangely enough it is now correct after several power cycles of the AP. Must be some caching issue somewhere.

Sorry for delayed reply but now that I check, mine displays the correct version as well with no action from me. As stated, probably cached and then expired.

<!-- gh-comment-id:3365558368 --> @jum0n commented on GitHub (Oct 3, 2025): > But strangely enough it is now correct after several power cycles of the AP. Must be some caching issue somewhere. Sorry for delayed reply but now that I check, mine displays the correct version as well with no action from me. As stated, probably cached and then expired.
Sign in to join this conversation.
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/OpenEPaperLink#2529