Bug#889072: chromium: Crash when opening print dialog (regression from v 63 in stable)
I am having the same issue. Chromium version 64.0.3282.119-1~deb9u1 exhibits the problem while version 63.0.3239.84-1~deb9u1 does not. I also am running with strict isolation enabled. I also agree that this is not a minor problem. It is actually kind of a big problem since there is now no way to safely print a page from Chromium. Turning off strict isolation is not a safe work around as far as I know. -- Tony Thedford
Bug#859220: Script /usr/share/lxcfs/lxc.mount.hook fails with mount command error 32 and causes lxc-start to fail
Package: lxc
Version: 2.0.7-2~bpo8+1
When I invoke the lxc-start command, it fails to start the container and
outputs this error information:
lxc-start 20170330232720.943 ERRORlxc_conf - conf.c:run_buffer:405 -
Script exited with status 32.
lxc-start 20170330232720.943 ERRORlxc_conf -
conf.c:lxc_setup:3890 - failed to run mount dhooks for container
'debian8-base'.
lxc-start 20170330232720.943 ERRORlxc_start -
start.c:do_start:811 - Failed to setup container "debian8-base".
lxc-start 20170330232720.943 ERRORlxc_sync -
sync.c:__sync_wait:57 - An error occurred in another process (expected
sequence number 3)
lxc-start 20170330232720.944 ERRORlxc_start -
start.c:__lxc_start:1346 - Failed to spawn container "debian8-base".
lxc-start 20170330232726.454 ERRORlxc_start_ui -
tools/lxc_start.c:main:366 - The container failed to start.
lxc-start 20170330232726.454 ERRORlxc_start_ui -
tools/lxc_start.c:main:368 - To get more details, run the container in
foreground mode.
lxc-start 20170330232726.454 ERRORlxc_start_ui -
tools/lxc_start.c:main:370 - Additional information can be obtained by
setting the --logfile and --logpriority options.
I traced the problem back to these lines in the script
/usr/share/lxcfs/lxc.mount.hook:
# Mount the new entries
for entry in /var/lib/lxcfs/cgroup/*; do
DEST=$(basename $entry)
if [ "$DEST" = "name=systemd" ]; then
DEST="systemd"
fi
if [ ! -d ${LXC_ROOTFS_MOUNT}/sys/fs/cgroup/${DEST} ]; then
mkdir ${LXC_ROOTFS_MOUNT}/sys/fs/cgroup/${DEST}
fi
mount -n --bind $entry
${LXC_ROOTFS_MOUNT}/sys/fs/cgroup/$DEST<-- ERROR 32 thrown here
causing program to exit since shell bang line includes bash set -e option.
The mount error is caused by the $entry variable containing the exact
string '/var/lib/lxcfs/cgroup/*' which is never a valid directory and
cannot be mounted. The error condition of entry =
'/var/lib/lxcfs/cgroup/*' is happening because the enclosing 'for' loop
returns this string in the case where there are no files contained in
the folder /var/lib/lxcfs/cgroup/ which is correct for bash operation.
To work around this condition I modified my
/usr/share/lxcfs/lxc.mount.hook script file as follows:
# Mount the new entries
for entry in /var/lib/lxcfs/cgroup/*; do
DEST=$(basename $entry)
### Tony inserted this FIX ##
if [ "$DEST" = "*" ]; then
break
fi
#
if [ "$DEST" = "name=systemd" ]; then
DEST="systemd"
fi
if [ ! -d ${LXC_ROOTFS_MOUNT}/sys/fs/cgroup/${DEST} ]; then
mkdir ${LXC_ROOTFS_MOUNT}/sys/fs/cgroup/${DEST}
fi
mount -n --bind $entry ${LXC_ROOTFS_MOUNT}/sys/fs/cgroup/$DEST
This seems to have fixed the problem and my computer lxc operation
appears to be working Ok now.
I am using Debian GNU/Linux 8 (jessie), kernel version 3.16.39-1+deb8u2,
libc6 2.19-18+deb8u7, bash version 4.3.30(1)-release, dash version
0.5.7-4+b1
Thanks
Bug#727708: [mjr.org] Re: Bug#727708: [gmail.com] Re: Bug#727708: call for votes on default Linux init system for jessie
It is just as I thought.. incompetence has taken control. Good luck with that. On 02/19/2014 08:30 AM, Paul Hedderly wrote: On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 01:51:56AM -0600, Tony Thedford wrote: On 02/18/2014 09:34 PM, Jason Frothingham wrote: ... Adopting systemd does not, in any way shape, form, idea, concept, conclusion, thought, etc. etc. etc. prevent, pervert, divert, etc. etc. etc. the goal of a computationally stable, bug-free, and flexible operating system.� First of all, YES it does.. and a lot.. and the majority of competent Debian users know this, and that is why you are catching so much hell over putting it Since you must have spoken to the majority of competant Debian users to know this... Could you write up a report of exactly what they said please it would be very helpful. Or point to the report you read and quoted? If not, then stop with the lies and the FUD. into Debian. And this is why so many people are coming out of the woodwork to express their concerns.. they are concerned about the integrity (stable, You're the third. Perhaps you three the only competant Debian users? bug-free, flexible) of Debian as a viable server and general purpose operating system for critical applications.. and they don't want it screwed with! You seem to think that you wont be able to chose not to use Systemd - so you've not read very much of the debate or done much research. Here is a clue. Systemd will never make it onto the non-linux ports, so there will always be at least one other init available. You will always have a choice. And you could step up to maintain more choice in Debian if you so desired rather than telling other volunteers what to do. That is the Debian way. I have been coding since the early 80's, so please don't go there with me, it doesn't work. I don't care about systemd's capabilities.. that is a mute point. Perhaps you meant a moot point. A mute point would be very quiet indeed. Lots of other people do care and have said so in this debate. I happen to be one using a lot of the new features to great effect, on desktops. AND SERVERS. All I need to know is that it is an overly complicated, unnecessary piece of crapware that reduces the integrity of the distribution and that is all that matters. You have to specific or you'll be accused of FUD. Hand waving and shouting does not count. _Can_ you give more information on how it is overcomplicated? Or unnecessary? Or crap? If not... quit with the lies and the FUD. As to you initial question about what I would have the developers do.. I would say do just that.. develop Debian software that continues to make it a truly universal operating system and follows the original intent of the Debian way. Could you quote what the Debian way is? Are you a DD involved in defining that elusive thing? For _me_ one part of Debian has always to excell in making amazing technology and code available for everyone. Times have changed in twenty years. The linux kernel is not the same as it was in 1991. Computers are not used in the same static ways. Debian has to support a huge range of very dynamic systems now, and sysV just does not cut it. Sure it works _ok_ on static environments - but Debian supports far more than static servers. Debian has been around almost as long as the Internet itself.. Debian was started in 1993. The internet... try about 1973. Yes Debian is half the age of the internet. It is nearly as old as the Linux kernel, and not that much younger than GNU, but your point is invalidated by lack of truth. there are a lot of users out here that don't want to see anyone mess it up! ..Figure out a way around being stuck having to use udev since it has been co-opted by systemd.. that would be my first task for you! If you don't want udev, then try Debian Potato. It might make you happy and will forever have sysvinit. And please stop with the FUD and other trolling. Regards On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 9:06 PM, Tony Thedford t...@accesslab.com wrote: Putting the systemd issue on bugs.debian.org is a bit ridiculous I would say! As to why there are developers within Debian who are hellbent on turning Debian into buggy desktop software rather than keeping with the universal operating system directive.. I will never know! Debian is a major force in global server software and therefore must remain extremely stable, bug-free, and flexible.. all of which systemd/gnome crapware nullifies! -- Tony Thedford Access Technologies 850 Belt Line Rd Garland, TX 75040 Phone: 972.414.8356 Email: t...@accesslab.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#727708: call for votes on default Linux init system for jessie
Putting the systemd issue on bugs.debian.org is a bit ridiculous I would say! As to why there are developers within Debian who are hellbent on turning Debian into buggy desktop software rather than keeping with the universal operating system directive.. I will never know! Debian is a major force in global server software and therefore must remain extremely stable, bug-free, and flexible.. all of which systemd/gnome crapware nullifies! -- Tony Thedford Access Technologies 850 Belt Line Rd Garland, TX 75040 Phone: 972.414.8356 Email: t...@accesslab.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#727708: [gmail.com] Re: Bug#727708: call for votes on default Linux init system for jessie
On 02/18/2014 09:34 PM, Jason Frothingham wrote: ... Adopting systemd does not, in any way shape, form, idea, concept, conclusion, thought, etc. etc. etc. prevent, pervert, divert, etc. etc. etc. the goal of a computationally stable, bug-free, and flexible operating system.� First of all, YES it does.. and a lot.. and the majority of competent Debian users know this, and that is why you are catching so much hell over putting it into Debian. And this is why so many people are coming out of the woodwork to express their concerns.. they are concerned about the integrity (stable, bug-free, flexible) of Debian as a viable server and general purpose operating system for critical applications.. and they don't want it screwed with! So do this, and other mailing lists a favor, knock off the Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt. �if you have the coding chops to actually comment on systemd's capabilities and features; or lack-thereof; at a code level rather than just at a Moronix Level, you'd probably be better off diving in and fixing bugs yourself.� I have been coding since the early 80's, so please don't go there with me, it doesn't work. I don't care about systemd's capabilities.. that is a mute point. All I need to know is that it is an overly complicated, unnecessary piece of crapware that reduces the integrity of the distribution and that is all that matters. As to you initial question about what I would have the developers do.. I would say do just that.. develop Debian software that continues to make it a truly universal operating system and follows the original intent of the Debian way. Debian has been around almost as long as the Internet itself.. there are a lot of users out here that don't want to see anyone mess it up! ..Figure out a way around being stuck having to use udev since it has been co-opted by systemd.. that would be my first task for you! On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 9:06 PM, Tony Thedford t...@accesslab.com mailto:t...@accesslab.com wrote: Putting the systemd issue on bugs.debian.org http://bugs.debian.org is a bit ridiculous I would say! As to why there are developers within Debian who are hellbent on turning Debian into buggy desktop software rather than keeping with the universal operating system directive.. I will never know! Debian is a major force in global server software and therefore must remain extremely stable, bug-free, and flexible.. all of which systemd/gnome crapware nullifies! -- Tony Thedford Access Technologies 850 Belt Line Rd Garland, TX 75040 Phone: 972.414.8356 Email: t...@accesslab.com
