The ZBMINIR2 firmware update fails time after time. Version 1.0.2 has only been available in theory for a few days. Each attempt starts the process, a progress bar is displayed for a moment, then a message is displayed to try again later. This is what happens in the eWeLink app.
In eWeLink Web the update is also visible, but once started it does not conclude. No message is displayed even though many hours pass. With eWeLink Web this is normal, as here no update ever completes. It has been like this for a very long time and there is no fix. Either this needs to be repaired/done decently, or this section needs to be removed as in its current state it puts the developers to shame.
1 Like
Hi!
I have exactly the same problem!
No way to upgrade firmware of ZBMINIR2 from 1.0.1 to 1.0.2, neither via ewelink app nor ewelink web.
I also see that from the setup menu there is no option to change the icon of the device… strange…
ZBMINIR2 which zigbee hub have you added to?
if for nspanel, the problem is often the distance of the nspanel from the router.
The distance of the zbminir2 device from the nspanel also causes update problems.
I don’t have ZBMINIR2 to check if the problem also occurs.
In my case, there are no such problems. Other Zigbee updates pass without fail. I’m leaving out the fuss about updating NSPanel Pro itself.
The server doesn’t respond or times out. And when it does respond, the firmware transfer stops at about 1%. Perhaps the file is corrupted or accidentally deleted or renamed.
@ward How does it look like from your side? Or is this a Sonoff problem?
Hi all
Have you succeeded in upgrading them? Had any luck with iHost or Z2M?
No luck and no go. Today it’s the same as it was before.
Thx for your reply.
Could you please try again later? There might be network issues. I just grabbed a unit, and it worked from my side. If you still have trouble upgrating them, please submit a support ticket so our dev can look into it.
In the meantime, we have been investigating this issue.
Many thanks.
Sure, I will and let you know.
It is a pity that there is no option to update manually. Repositories are available. Unofficial, but nevertheless some can be trusted. Such an option could be added to the paid eWeLink Web. After all, it is for enthusiasts who know what they are doing. At least most of them do 
Thx for the idea! But I’m not sure if it could work (I assume you were talking about downloading the OTA package and uploading it directly to the device).
It needs more work from the gateway side (ZB) and device firmware (Wi-Fi devices).
ATM, Sonoff ZigBee devices can be updated via Z2M, and I think they are working to bring better support for ZHA, too.
The usefulness of ZHA’s Sonoff firmware update option is virtually nonexistent. I saw on the GitHub forum that there was a discussion, I think with @yitie. But no particular conclusion was reached. I have tried various update options in ZHA several times and none of them worked with Sonoff devices. Interestingly, manually forcing an OTA with IKEA devices always works. I updated an old rotary dimmer this way and it finally stopped eating up the battery. Sentiment, as this is my first Zigbee that still works and is very slick
BTW, it’s a shame that eWeLink/Sonoff don’t run a single, integrated page with information on current firmware versions. Now the info is scattered and not necessarily updated.
They will gradually add update logs for more devices
I think a table page, broken down by product category, would be better. Clean, simple and straightforward. Something like the eWeLink Web, but with a release date. Possibly with a reference/link to the list of changes.
1 Like
Are there any outcomes of the investigation already?
Hey
It’s a gray-scale release and should cover all users by tomorrow. Does it work for you now?
Good morning
If it is a canary release, why is it offered in the App anyway?
No, no go yet. I’ve just checked it.
Not canary, just a release strategy; might be some network issue. So please wait for some time and see if the update will arrive by then.
I know other definition, because Canary release is also called grayscale release. It is a smooth approach for version upgrades. During this process, some users experience the new version while others continue with the old one. Once the new version is stable, it gradually takes over all the live traffic. Is that right? 
Thanks for the context. It’s stable firmware that will be gradually released to users in case any unexpected issues happen and ease the pressure on the server.
I use the phase more for early beta/nightly-built releases like this one:
Are we moving towards a conclusion? It still ends in failure. I am not pushing but am curious to know the reason.
Just checked the coverage with our team it is 30% at the moment 