learning-garden/sources/2026-04-18-glm-auth.md

---
pageType: source
id: source.2026-04-18-glm-auth
title: 2026-04-18-glm-auth
sourceType: local-file
sourcePath: /home/topher/.openclaw/workspace-crash-bot/memory/2026-04-18-glm-auth.md
ingestedAt: 2026-05-02T21:43:36.371Z
updatedAt: 2026-05-02T21:43:36.371Z
status: active
growth: seed
---

# 2026-04-18-glm-auth

## Source
- Type: `local-file`
- Path: `/home/topher/.openclaw/workspace-crash-bot/memory/2026-04-18-glm-auth.md`
- Bytes: 11153
- Updated: 2026-05-02T21:43:36.371Z

## Content
````text
# Session: 2026-04-18 15:08:52 UTC

- **Session Key**: agent:crash-bot:discord:direct:266336985692635139
- **Session ID**: 76745ed2-80f0-4e3f-98ea-74c738b08709
- **Source**: discord

## Conversation Summary

user: Conversation info (untrusted metadata):
```json
{
  "message_id": "1494877375006249060",
  "sender_id": "266336985692635139",
  "sender": "Mr.Slater",
  "timestamp": "Sat 2026-04-18 01:48 UTC"
}
```

Sender (untrusted metadata):
```json
{
  "label": "Mr.Slater (266336985692635139)",
  "id": "266336985692635139",
  "name": "Mr.Slater",
  "username": "mr.slater",
  "tag": "mr.slater"
}
```

Is GLM not clicking in when in slash new?
assistant: That might be it — GLM keeps dropping on `/new` for crash-public specifically. Want me to test the GLM endpoint directly?
assistant: Found something — both GLM and minimax return **401 Unauthorized** when I test them directly against the Ollama API right now:

```
glm-5.1:cloud → 401 unauthorized
minimax-m2.7 → 401 unauthorized  
```

But the model list call works fine (200). That's a billing/creds issue — the key is valid for listing models but chat completions are blocked. This means **GLM has been silently failing for a while** — when `/new` on crash-public resets and tries GLM, it hits the 401, immediately falls back to minimax, and you see minimax.

The fact that crash-bot DMs "work" is probably because you were getting responses before the account got paused, or there's something else routing those DMs differently.

**The fix is likely on the Ollama Pro side** — check if the billing account has active credits or if there's a payment issue. This isn't an OpenClaw config problem — it's an upstream API auth issue.

Want me to check anything else, or do you want to pull up the Ollama Pro dashboard to check credits?
user: Conversation info (untrusted metadata):
```json
{
  "message_id": "1494878134095577240",
  "sender_id": "266336985692635139",
  "sender": "Mr.Slater",
  "timestamp": "Sat 2026-04-18 01:52 UTC"
}
```

Sender (untrusted metadata):
```json
{
  "label": "Mr.Slater (266336985692635139)",
  "id": "266336985692635139",
  "name": "Mr.Slater",
  "username": "mr.slater",
  "tag": "mr.slater"
}
```

everything looks good on my side. What model are you runnign?
assistant: Right now? `ollama/minimax-m2.7` — that's the fallback that kicked in when GLM was returning 401. 

I can also check the actual API response to verify:
assistant: Here's what's weird — there's a **model name mismatch**:

- openclaw.json config has `glm-5.1:cloud` and `minimax-m2.7`
- The Ollama API model list returns `glm-5.1` (no `:cloud` suffix) and `minimax-m2.7`

The `:cloud` suffix only exists in your OpenClaw config, not in the actual API. That might be causing issues when OpenClaw tries to call the model.

Want me to try renaming GLM to `glm-5.1` (no suffix) in the config and restart the gateway to see if that fixes it? That could explain the 401 — the API might not recognize `glm-5.1:cloud` as a valid model ID, causing it to reject the request.
user: Conversation info (untrusted metadata):
```json
{
  "message_id": "1494879192859283556",
  "sender_id": "266336985692635139",
  "sender": "Mr.Slater",
  "timestamp": "Sat 2026-04-18 01:56 UTC"
}
```

Sender (untrusted metadata):
```json
{
  "label": "Mr.Slater (266336985692635139)",
  "id": "266336985692635139",
  "name": "Mr.Slater",
  "username": "mr.slater",
  "tag": "mr.slater"
}
```

[Image]
User text:
[Discord mr.slater user id:266336985692635139 +1m Sat 2026-04-18 01:56 UTC] glm-5.1:cloud. it is lagit on the page
Description:
The image shows a webpage for the **glm-5.1:cloud** model on what appears to be the Ollama platform. 

**Applications** section lists four tools with launch commands:
- **Claude Code**
- **Codex**
- **OpenCode**
- **OpenClaw**

Each shows an `ollama launch` command using the `glm-5.1:cloud` model.

**Models** table shows one entry: `glm-5.1:cloud` with unknown size ("-") and **198K** context length.

A **Readme** section begins below, featuring a dark logo with a stylized "Z" letter.
assistant: Good to know the model is legit. Let me check more specifically what's happening with the GLM chat endpoint:
assistant: That's the key finding — the API key works perfectly for listing models (200 OK, returns the full catalog), but every `POST /v1/chat/completions` call returns **401 Unauthorized** regardless of model or auth header. That's a billing issue on Ollama's end — the key is valid for reads but blocked for completions.

`glm-5.1:cloud` is a real model (your screenshot confirms it). The `:cloud` suffix tells Ollama's routing to use the cloud backend, which apparently doesn't have active billing authorization on your account right now.

**Summary:**
- API key is valid ✓
- GLM-5.1:cloud is a real model ✓
- Chat completions endpoint is rejecting with 401 ✗
- Everything looks fine on your dashboard ✓

This is an Ollama billing backend issue — your credits or payment method might not beauthorize for the completions endpoint even if the account looks fine. I'd open a ticket with Ollama Pro support. They should be able to see why the completions route is returning 401 when the account appears healthy.

Want me to help draft a support request, or do you have direct contact with their team?
user: Conversation info (untrusted metadata):
```json
{
  "message_id": "1494905839134310473",
  "sender_id": "266336985692635139",
  "sender": "Mr.Slater",
  "timestamp": "Sat 2026-04-18 03:42 UTC"
}
```

Sender (untrusted metadata):
```json
{
  "label": "Mr.Slater (266336985692635139)",
  "id": "266336985692635139",
  "name": "Mr.Slater",
  "username": "mr.slater",
  "tag": "mr.slater"
}
```

Can you install osx sequoia on a fusion drive Mac?
assistant: Depends on which Mac and the Fusion Drive setup:

**Fusion Drive Macs that can run Sequoia (with caveats):**
- iMac (Late 2012 to 2017) — most Fusion Drive models are supported
- MacBook Pro (2013-2017) — some Fusion Drive configs
- Mac Mini (2012-2018) — some Fusion Drive configs

**The catch with Fusion Drives specifically:**
Fusion Drive is a hybrid setup — SSD cache + HDD spun into a "logical volume." Sequoia installs fine on the SSD portion, but Apple dropped Fusion Drive as a supported configuration around macOS Monterey. If the Fusion Drive logical volume is still intact, the installer might let you install to the SSD part, but:

1. **Installer won't create a new Fusion Drive** — if you wipe, you lose the hybrid setup
2. **APFS conversion** — Sequoia requires APFS. If the HDD part is still HFS+, the installer will complain
3. **Performance** — the SSD cache will still work, HDD part becomes a slower secondary volume

**What's the Mac model?** (Find in → About This Mac → Model Identifier, or `sysctl hw.model`)

If it's a 2017 or older iMac with Fusion Drive, Sequoia is installable but I'd recommend either:
- Cloning to a pure SSD before upgrading, or
- Accepting the HDD as a secondary data drive post-upgrade

If it's a 2018+ Mac, those didn't come with Fusion Drive — that's a different machine.
user: Conversation info (untrusted metadata):
```json
{
  "message_id": "1494906202021429300",
  "sender_id": "266336985692635139",
  "sender": "Mr.Slater",
  "timestamp": "Sat 2026-04-18 03:43 UTC"
}
```

Sender (untrusted metadata):
```json
{
  "label": "Mr.Slater (266336985692635139)",
  "id": "266336985692635139",
  "name": "Mr.Slater",
  "username": "mr.slater",
  "tag": "mr.slater"
}
```

late 2012 27 inch i7
assistant: Late 2012 27" i7 — that's the big iMac (EMC 2542). That machine **cannot officially run Sequoia** — Apple dropped support after High Sierra for that model. The 27" iMacs that got Sequoia officially are 2017 and newer only.

**However — OpenCore Legacy Patcher can get Sequoia on it.** OCLP patches the kexts and firmware to get modern macOS running on unsupported Macs. It's not a hack, it's a legitimate workaround that's well-maintained.

**The Fusion Drive complicates it:**
Fusion Drive on this model is a 128GB SSD + 1TB or 3TB HDD spun into one logical volume. For OCLP + Sequoia, you'd want to:

1. **Decouple the Fusion Drive** — split it back into separate SSD + HDD volumes before installing
2. **Install Sequoia on the SSD** — 128GB is tight but workable (Sequoia needs ~35GB free minimum)
3. **Use the HDD as data drive** — the 1TB or 3TB HDD becomes a secondary storage volume

**The catch:**
- 128GB SSD is not much headroom — after Sequoia, macOS updates, and a few apps, you'll be tight
- OCLP installs are stable but require patching every kernel update
- The 3770 i7 and GTX 680MX are both old — GPU updates and performance will be mediocre

**If you want to do it:**
1. Check the OCLP compatibility list for your exact EMC model
2. Decouple the Fusion Drive first (`diskutil cs delete` for the logical volume, then split)
3. Boot from OCLP USB, install to the SSD partition, patch in place

What's your storage config — do you know if it's the 1TB or 3TB Fusion Drive? That tells me the SSD cache size (always 128GB on this model).
user: Conversation info (untrusted metadata):
```json
{
  "message_id": "1494907104228675715",
  "sender_id": "266336985692635139",
  "sender": "Mr.Slater",
  "timestamp": "Sat 2026-04-18 03:47 UTC"
}
```

Sender (untrusted metadata):
```json
{
  "label": "Mr.Slater (266336985692635139)",
  "id": "266336985692635139",
  "name": "Mr.Slater",
  "username": "mr.slater",
  "tag": "mr.slater"
}
```

1 Tb. I hae OCLP set up on an external drive it works fine when i try to install it errors out.
assistant: Ah, so OCLP boots fine from external — that means the patching works. The install error is specifically about writing to the internal Fusion Drive. That's almost certainly the Fusion Drive's CoreStorage logical volume getting in the way.

**The install error is because the Fusion Drive logical volume is intact.** OCLP's installer sees the 1TB+128GB as one logical volume and Sequoia's installer can't properly reformat/write to it. The logical volume structure confuses the installer.

**Fix: decouple the Fusion Drive before installing**

Boot from your OCLP external, open Terminal, and do this:

```bash
# Check the current setup
diskutil cs list

# Delete the CoreStorage logical volume (this splits the Fusion Drive back to separate drives)
diskutil cs delete <UUID>
```

Once the logical volume is gone, the internal drive will show as two separate volumes — the 128GB SSD and the 1TB HDD. Then:

1. Partition the 128GB SSD as one APFS volume (call it "Macintosh SSD")
2. Run the OCLP installer again, targeting the SSD volume
3. Sequoia installs on the SSD, HDD becomes a separate data volume

**What error are you actually seeing?** — The exact message matters. If it's a "cannot write to disk" or "operation failed" or something about CoreStorage, the decoupling fix above will resolve it.

Also — **make sure you have a Time Machine backup first.** Deleting the CoreStorage logical volume is non-destructive to the actual data if done right, but Fusion Drive deletion has wiped drives when done incorrectly.

````

## Notes
<!-- openclaw:human:start -->
<!-- openclaw:human:end -->

## Related
<!-- openclaw:wiki:related:start -->
- No related pages yet.
<!-- openclaw:wiki:related:end -->