Re: Debian got too fat?

[Harald Dunkel]

Hi Reco,

On 7/15/18 1:44 PM, Reco wrote:

Hi.

On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 12:16:20PM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:

Hi folks,

would you mind to take a look at

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=888743

The fix is pretty easy.


But does not address all the cornercases, IMO.
Consider, for instance, an LXC container which shares root filesystem
with the host.



The "pidof -c" is just a workaround. In your case pidofproc would
fall back into the current (broken) functionality, AFAICS. A *clean*
solution would give /bin/pidof the boot and rely upon the PID files
in /run only.

This is not the problem here. The problem is that things like this
don't get fixed because its pretty complex code for an easy task.
Changing it might have unforeseeable side effects and nobody dares
to touch it.


Regards
Harri

Re: Regarding Installation over Windows 10

[john doe]

On 7/16/2018 4:22 AM, Vijay Sehgal wrote:

Thanks Ben for replying.

I know the architecture of my machine which is 64-bit(amd)
But check this link -
https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/bt-dvd/
I am following this. Here when you scroll down, you will find 3 iso files.
I have downloaded the first one.

My question is do i have to download the other two also & what's the use of
other two?



If you have an internet connection available it's probably safe to only 
use the first dvd.


The other two dvds are more packages (programs) that you might need, the 
pkgs can always be installed at a later time.


Note that those are torrent files; you will need a bittorrent 
application to download the "real" iso file.


P.S. If you don't know what bittorrent is use this URL instead:

https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/iso-dvd/

debian-9.5.0-amd64-DVD-1.iso 2018-07-14 13:13  3.4G

--
John Doe

Re: Compiler segfault when building the kernel

[Celejar]

On Tue, 13 Jun 2017 20:41:25 +0300
Adrian Bunk  wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 11:57:55AM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> > On Mon, 12 Jun 2017 10:45:17 +0300
> > Adrian Bunk  wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 07:58:12AM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> > > > Hi,

...

> > > > line "root_cmd = fakeroot") without problem. Recently, the builds have
> > > > begun to fail with messages like these:
> > 
> > ...
> > 
> > > > > ./include/linux/rcu_sync.h:29:48: internal compiler error: 
> > > > > Segmentation fault
> > > > >  enum rcu_sync_type { RCU_SYNC, RCU_SCHED_SYNC, RCU_BH_SYNC };
> > > > > ^

...

> > > > > The bug is not reproducible, so it is likely a hardware or OS problem.

...

> "internal compiler error that is not 100% reproducible" - at that point 
> it is nearly certain that the underlying problem is a hardware problem.

Just for the record, extensive testing with memtest86 and memtest86+
confirmed that one of my DIMMs was bad. I've replaced it, and have not
had a recurrence of the problem (although I now usually offload kernel
compilaton to a different machine anyway).

Thanks, Adrian.

Celejar

apache 2.4 envvars ? Deb 9.4

[Dave]

when i run apache2, i get an error APACHE_PID_FILE missspelled or 
unknown var.


and how do i include the "envvars" in the apache2.conf file ?

if i remove this varible i get no error but, i get errors when i try to 
install php saying missing "envvars /var/run/apache2/pid.pid"


the envvars file only has 1 active line

APACHE_PID_FILE /var/run/apapche2.pid


please advise.

Re: Regarding Installation over Windows 10

[Vijay Sehgal]

Thanks Ben for replying.

I know the architecture of my machine which is 64-bit(amd)
But check this link -
https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/bt-dvd/
I am following this. Here when you scroll down, you will find 3 iso files.
I have downloaded the first one.

My question is do i have to download the other two also & what's the use of
other two?

Thanks!

On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 7:47 AM Ben Finney  wrote:

> Vijay Sehgal  writes:
>
> > I want to install Linux on my machine.
>
> Welcome! Thank you for choosing to install Debian.
>
> > Can anyone guide me via walkthrough to how to do that?
>
> The installation guide is at
> https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/installmanual>, you can
> choose one for your language.
>
> > What is the use of other 2 iso files of nearly same size?
>
> Different architectures are incompatible; they need separate
> installation programs. You will need to choose the right one (and choose
> the corresponding Debian installation manual).
>
>
> You will need to know the “architecture” of your machine; this is a term
> roughly meaning “what is the CPU in the machine”.
>
> For a machine on which you are running MS Windows, the architecture is
> almost certainly “64-bit PC (amd64)”.
>
> --
>  \   “Anyone who puts a small gloss on [a] fundamental technology, |
>   `\  calls it proprietary, and then tries to keep others from |
> _o__)   building on it, is a thief.” —Tim O'Reilly, 2000-01-25 |
> Ben Finney
>
>

Re: Regarding Installation over Windows 10

[Ben Finney]

Vijay Sehgal  writes:

> I want to install Linux on my machine.

Welcome! Thank you for choosing to install Debian.

> Can anyone guide me via walkthrough to how to do that?

The installation guide is at
https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/installmanual>, you can
choose one for your language.

> What is the use of other 2 iso files of nearly same size?

Different architectures are incompatible; they need separate
installation programs. You will need to choose the right one (and choose
the corresponding Debian installation manual).


You will need to know the “architecture” of your machine; this is a term
roughly meaning “what is the CPU in the machine”.

For a machine on which you are running MS Windows, the architecture is
almost certainly “64-bit PC (amd64)”.

-- 
 \   “Anyone who puts a small gloss on [a] fundamental technology, |
  `\  calls it proprietary, and then tries to keep others from |
_o__)   building on it, is a thief.” —Tim O'Reilly, 2000-01-25 |
Ben Finney

Regarding Installation over Windows 10

[Vijay Sehgal]

Hey,

I am writing in reference to the above stated subject. I want to install
Linux on my machine.

Can anyone guide me via walkthrough to how to do that?
I have downloaded one iso file of 3.38 GB but there are 2 more in 64bit
without internet installation. Do i have to install other 2 iso files also?

What is the use of other 2 iso files of nearly same size?

Re: Naive newbie question [Re: Debian got too fat?]

[John Crawley]

On 2018-07-16 04:33, Richard Owlett wrote:

Can I a Debian user opt to not install "LSB" without ill effects?


Some ...er, many Debian packages depend on lsb-base.
'apt-cache rdepends lsb-base' for a long list.
--
John

Re: Naive newbie question [Re: Debian got too fat?]

[tomas]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 02:33:02PM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:

[...]

> Is it of any use to Debian _users_ who *ONLY* use official Debian
> repositories?

It is useful for someone who wants to write a program which shall
run on an LSB-compliant system.

The _users_ profit from that because writing programs for them
becomes easier.

So yes.

Cheers
- -- t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAltLtLUACgkQBcgs9XrR2kYxxgCeN+HX+9fTmDCpeyfjqiCVPkuF
bjkAn1rkzITSjwHT5JSCFAiK2N6ull1G
=yWFL
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Naive newbie question [Re: Debian got too fat?]

[Reco]

Hi.

On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 02:33:02PM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> > > What is your suggestion here? Apply the patch I provided (or maybe a
> > > better one), or get rid of lsb-base completely?
> > 
> > Aim to ditch lsb-base in the long run.
> > For here and now I'd used something like 'pgrep -x --ns 1
> > $DAEMON_EXECUTABLE' instead of pidof.
> 
> I didn't know what "lsb-base" was when I read original post.
> Not sure I know now ;/
> Did web search. Found it's an acronym for "Linux Standard Base".

In the context of the original discussion, LSB refers to
/lib/lsb/init-functions provided by lsb-base package.


> Searched.
> Found its purpose was to provide outside programmers a "sane" &/or
> "consistent" target.

LSB was more than that. It was a set of standards declaring what you can
find in your typical GNU/Linux system.
LSB was always somewhat controversial when one tried to apply it to any
non-rpm distribution (LSB mandated rpm as package manager), personal
tastes (LSB mandated both Qt and GTK+ installed) or a common sense
(not every server needs CUPS contrary to what they think).
What's true - one does not need LSB if one writes free software. LSB was
designed for all those proprietary software vendors in mind.

But, they invented Docker, Flatpack and Appimage since then, so LSB is
dead, and good riddance.


> Is it of any use to Debian _users_ who *ONLY* use official Debian
> repositories?

Assuming that said users do not deviate from the Debian default init
system - lsb-base is mostly useless if one's using systemd.
Again, in the context of the original question.


> I know that is a "loaded" question".
> Answers should be "food for thought."
> 
> IOW Can I a Debian user opt to not install "LSB" without ill effects?

The package has 'Priority: required', so I suppose that one *could*
build a bootable Debian installation without it given a sufficient
determination or curiosity.

I, for one, value rsync, smartmontools and rsyslod too much to purge
lsb-base. And let's not forget cron. Any OS is imperfect unless it has
cron.

Reco

Naive newbie question [Re: Debian got too fat?]

[Richard Owlett]

On 07/15/2018 06:44 AM, Reco wrote:

Hi.

On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 12:16:20PM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:

Hi folks,

would you mind to take a look at

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=888743

The fix is pretty easy.


But does not address all the cornercases, IMO.
Consider, for instance, an LXC container which shares root filesystem
with the host.



Whats really bugging me is that nobody
dares to touch the complex code of lsb-base. IMHO this is a clear
indication that Debian lost the blessed path other Unixes do follow.


Agreed. Debian drifted away from LSB several years ago, so the lack of
maintainers' interest is sad, but is to be expected.



What is your suggestion here? Apply the patch I provided (or maybe a
better one), or get rid of lsb-base completely?


Aim to ditch lsb-base in the long run.
For here and now I'd used something like 'pgrep -x --ns 1
$DAEMON_EXECUTABLE' instead of pidof.


I didn't know what "lsb-base" was when I read original post.
Not sure I know now ;/
Did web search. Found it's an acronym for "Linux Standard Base".
Searched.
Found its purpose was to provide outside programmers a "sane" &/or 
"consistent" target.


Is it of any use to Debian _users_ who *ONLY* use official Debian 
repositories?


I know that is a "loaded" question".
Answers should be "food for thought."

IOW Can I a Debian user opt to not install "LSB" without ill effects?

Re: Warning: Debian/testing full-upgrade removes security packages!

[Reco]

Hi.

On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 01:02:48PM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 06:07:32PM +0200, Hans wrote:
> > Am Sonntag, 15. Juli 2018, 17:43:47 CEST schrieb Henrique de Moraes 
> > Holschuh:
> > 
> > Maybe I was not clear enough. I did not mourn,. that packages are 
> > dienstalled, 
> > this may happen in testing. I mourned,m that almost ALL SECURITY related 
> > packages are deinstalled. And I would have nothing said, if it would have 
> > been 
> > one or maybe two, bat ALL most important rootkit watchers? And intrusion 
> > detection? This was the point.
>
> The idea that this is part of some conspiracy just seems wrong.  There
> must be another logical explanation.

I'd put my money on some debconf breakage (the only Depends all those
packages have at common), but [1] claims that the most recent debconf
migration to testing happened a month ago.
Next most possible candidate is a perl-base, but if [2] is to be
trusted, perl migration to testing was more than a month ago too.

So a conspiracy idea does not seem that weird. On the contrary, it would
look absolutely hilarious in the light of the news such as [3].
Or it might be broken Debian mirror that OP's using.

Reco

[1] https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/debconf
[2] https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/perl
[3] https://linux.slashdot.org/story/18/06/09/052249

Re: Warning: Debian/testing full-upgrade removes security packages!

[John Hasler]

Henrique de Moraes Hols writes:
> Same goes for dist-upgrade.  dist-upgrade/full-upgrade will more
> aggressively attempt to remove packages than the alternatives
> safe-upgrade and upgrade.

I always do "upgrade" and look at what did not get upgraded and why.  I
then sometimes follow with "full-upgrade" and other times just upgrade
selected packages.  Testing is always consistent but not always
complete.  Unstable is always complete but not always consistent.  Only
Stable is both.
-- 
John Hasler 
jhas...@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA

Re: Warning: Debian/testing full-upgrade removes security packages!

[Roberto C . Sánchez]

On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 06:07:32PM +0200, Hans wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 15. Juli 2018, 17:43:47 CEST schrieb Henrique de Moraes Holschuh:
> 
> Maybe I was not clear enough. I did not mourn,. that packages are 
> dienstalled, 
> this may happen in testing. I mourned,m that almost ALL SECURITY related 
> packages are deinstalled. And I would have nothing said, if it would have 
> been 
> one or maybe two, bat ALL most important rootkit watchers? And intrusion 
> detection? This was the point.
> 

What you are writing does not make sense.  I almost replied to your
first message after you posted it, but I had to leave.  After
researching the packages you mention, they are all currently in testing.
That means that the removal would have to be triggered by a package
conflict.  Even if a package were not in testing, the system would not
automatically removed it (unless you explicitly removed packages without
a corresponding apt source).

Can you post your sources.list and/or sources.list.d/ entries and also
your dpkg.log that shows the specific packages being removed?

The idea that this is part of some conspiracy just seems wrong.  There
must be another logical explanation.

Regards,

-Roberto

-- 
Roberto C. Sánchez

Re: Thunderbird always launching 2 copies.

[Curt]

On 2018-07-15, Octopus Octopus  wrote:
>
> which thunderbird produces
>
> /usr/bin/thunderbird
>
> launching it through the terminal does not alter the results.
> *I have disabled all addons and seems to have solved the problem. *I
> might go through some further testing to see if it relates to
> xul-ext-google-tasks-sync or xul-ext-firetray since those are both
> addons from the repos I'm currently using (this problem occurred in both
> and stretch to buster). However Reenabling all addons seems to not have
> reproduced the issue. I believe it might be caused by Provider for
> Google Calendar but I don't believe I got it from the debian repos (or
> that its even there).
>

I've heard that firetray doesn't close windows by default but rather
hides them in the systray, which means they can restored in the context
menu of the systray icon, but equally signifies they reappear when
Thunderbird is restarted. To alter that behavior right-click the icon,
select preferences, and unclick 'Closing window hides to systray', or
alternatively 'Only last window can be hidden'. 

Re: Warning: Debian/testing full-upgrade removes security packages!

[Hans]

Am Sonntag, 15. Juli 2018, 17:43:47 CEST schrieb Henrique de Moraes Holschuh:

Maybe I was not clear enough. I did not mourn,. that packages are dienstalled, 
this may happen in testing. I mourned,m that almost ALL SECURITY related 
packages are deinstalled. And I would have nothing said, if it would have been 
one or maybe two, bat ALL most important rootkit watchers? And intrusion 
detection? This was the point.

Best regards

Hans 
> On Sun, 15 Jul 2018, The Wanderer wrote:
> > >> be warned: Wheh you do apt full-upgrade,
> > > 
> > > You're in testing: what are you "full-upgrade"-ing to and why?
> > 
> > To testing, of course.
> 
> Eh, I believe the meant that as "why are you using full-upgrade instead
> of safe-upgrade or upgrade" (depending on which frontend), which are not
> nearly as aggressive at removing packages.
> 
> Same goes for dist-upgrade.  dist-upgrade/full-upgrade will more
> aggressively attempt to remove packages than the alternatives
> safe-upgrade and upgrade.  AFAIK, anyway.

Re: Warning: Debian/testing full-upgrade removes security packages!

[Henrique de Moraes Holschuh]

On Sun, 15 Jul 2018, The Wanderer wrote:
> >> be warned: Wheh you do apt full-upgrade,
> > 
> > You're in testing: what are you "full-upgrade"-ing to and why?
> 
> To testing, of course.

Eh, I believe the meant that as "why are you using full-upgrade instead
of safe-upgrade or upgrade" (depending on which frontend), which are not
nearly as aggressive at removing packages.

Same goes for dist-upgrade.  dist-upgrade/full-upgrade will more
aggressively attempt to remove packages than the alternatives
safe-upgrade and upgrade.  AFAIK, anyway.

-- 
  Henrique Holschuh

Re: Stretch 9.5 amd64 kernel panic

[Andy Smith]

Hello,

On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 08:48:18PM -0400, Chuck Zmudzinski wrote:
> I captured a little bit of what was written to the xen console
> when the kernel panics which is shown below.
> 
> Anyone else seen this?

Seems the new point release kernel broke Xen PV:



Cheers,
Andy

-- 
https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting

Re: Thunderbird always launching 2 copies.

[Octopus Octopus]

which thunderbird produces

/usr/bin/thunderbird

launching it through the terminal does not alter the results.
*I have disabled all addons and seems to have solved the problem. *I
might go through some further testing to see if it relates to
xul-ext-google-tasks-sync or xul-ext-firetray since those are both
addons from the repos I'm currently using (this problem occurred in both
and stretch to buster). However Reenabling all addons seems to not have
reproduced the issue. I believe it might be caused by Provider for
Google Calendar but I don't believe I got it from the debian repos (or
that its even there).

On 07/15/2018 05:59 AM, Carl Fink wrote:
> On 07/15/2018 12:54 AM, Octopus Octopus wrote:
>> Heyo,
>>
>>
>> I'm having this confusing bug where I launch thunderbird and it instead
>> launches 2 copies of it, I originally had an extra .desktop file for the
>> thunderbird-beta deleting it had no effect.
>>
> Does it do that if you launch Thunderbird from the command line,
> instead of by clicking a link? What is the result of
> 'which thunderbird'?
>

Re: HP ProLiant ML350p Gen8 Hot Plug 6 LFF - Is Jessie or Stretch ok?

[Dan Ritter]

On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 05:28:47PM +0100, Bernie Elbourn wrote:
> Hi
> 
> I have one of these running Wheezy - been stable for years without issue. It
> also has original firmware etc. Yep - needs updating
> 
> Has anyone got one of these running Jessie, or Stretch OK ... Is/was there 
> any pain?
> 
> Debian is actually safely on a sata ssd - the raid array holds all the data 
> in logical volumes.
> 

This will all work with stretch. Go through Jessie first.

Some large percentage of the HP P8xx RAID cards eventually
developed hardware bugs that would crash the system. If that
starts happening to you:

1. Backup your data to another system.
2. Replace the P8xx card with an LSI 20xx or 30xx SAS/SATA card.
   There are relatively cheap adapter cables that will work.
   Check before buying.
3. Create new RAID and filesystems, restore your data.

-dsr-

Re: Warning: Debian/testing full-upgrade removes security packages!

[The Wanderer]

On 2018-07-15 at 10:09, David Wright wrote:

> On Sun 15 Jul 2018 at 07:49:36 (+0200), Hans wrote:
> 
>> Hi folks,
>> 
>> be warned: Wheh you do apt full-upgrade,
> 
> You're in testing: what are you "full-upgrade"-ing to and why?

To testing, of course.

Just because you're running testing doesn't mean the package versions
you have installed are the ones currently available from testing. If you
last upgraded more than about a day ago, there's a very good chance that
one or more of your installed packages has a newer version available in
testing now.

Running upgrade commands on at least an intermittent basis is just good,
normal practice for tracking testing.

That said, the nature of testing does sometimes mean that the result is
not entirely stable and consistent, so occasionally you get undesired
package-removal results such as the ones described in this thread. The
solution is generally to either specify explicitly (on the upgrade
command line) which packages you want to retain, or wait until whatever
dependency-resolution situation led to the problem gets resolved.

-- 
   The Wanderer

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Warning: Debian/testing full-upgrade removes security packages!

[David Wright]

On Sun 15 Jul 2018 at 07:49:36 (+0200), Hans wrote:
> Hi folks,
> 
> be warned: Wheh you do apt full-upgrade,

You're in testing: what are you "full-upgrade"-ing to and why?

> then most security tools, we rely on, 
> are deinstallesd. These are rkhunter, chrootkit, autopsy, tripwire, 
> needrestart and tiger. Also forensics-full and forensics-all are deinstalled 
> (however, this might have other reasons).
> 
> This is no good behaviour, and it looks for me like the preparation for a 
> global attack on debian. 
> 
> Maybe it is wanted by the maintainers, but to remove suddenly almost all of 
> the most effective tools looks very, very fishy to me!
> 
> Keep your eyes open, the NSA is everywhere.

Cheers,
David.

[Xen]: Heads UP: kernel from linux-image-4.9.0-7-amd64 might not boot on Xen

[Markus Schönhaber]

Hi,

if you are running Debian on Xen you should keep your eyes open when
upgrading the kernel.
For me, the kernel 4.9.110-1 from the linux-image-4.9.0-7-amd64 package
wouldn't boot as a DomU kernel. As I've read, it won't work as a Dom0
kernel either (I didn't check that, though).

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=903767

-- 
Regards
  mks

Re: HP ProLiant ML350p Gen8 Hot Plug 6 LFF - Is Jessie or Stretch ok?

[rv riveravaldez]

On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 1:28 PM, Bernie Elbourn  wrote:
> Hi
>
> I have one of these running Wheezy - been stable for years without issue. It
> also has original firmware etc. Yep - needs updating
>
> Has anyone got one of these running Jessie, or Stretch OK ... Is/was there
> any pain?
>
> Debian is actually safely on a sata ssd - the raid array holds all the data
> in logical volumes.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bernie
>

Why don't you try a live version?

Re: [SOLVED] Re: apt-get update hangs forever

[Cindy-Sue Causey]

On 7/15/18, deloptes  wrote:
> Carl Fink wrote:
>
>> May we assume you tried switching repos? Because the only times I've
>> seen that, a particular repository was unreachable.
>
> no, I have not switched anything, but your answer helped me rewind the tape
> back and yes I have added one source (Signal) by myself and the stupid
> skype package adds it's source each time you install it, so I removed both
> and now it works. I would bet it hangs on the Signal source.
>
> thank you very much for the hint


There's also this that JUST occurred:

https://lists.debian.org/debian-announce/2018/msg3.html

+++ BEGIN QUOTE +++

The Debian project is pleased to announce the fifth update of its stable
distribution Debian 9 (codename "stretch"). This point release mainly
adds corrections for security issues, along with a few adjustments for
serious problems. Security advisories have already been published
separately and are referenced where available.

Please note that the point release does not constitute a new version of
Debian 9 but only updates some of the packages included. There is no
need to throw away old "stretch" media. After installation, packages can
be upgraded to the current versions using an up-to-date Debian mirror.

Those who frequently install updates from security.debian.org won't have
to update many packages, and most such updates are included in the point
release.

New installation images will be available soon at the regular locations.

+++ END QUOTE +++

It's possible a mirror was burping or something, too. That last line
is the hint there.

I'm on a brand new, 24-hour-old debootstrap that was 100% up-to-date,
*yes, including security releases (grin)*. I just  "apt-get updated".
It took about 4 hours and now says another 23MB of upgrades are needed
that quickly. :D

Just thought to check libreoffice, too, since I hadn't install it again and yet:

0 upgraded, 132 newly installed, 0 to remove and 38 not upgraded.
Need to get 132 kB/179 MB of archives.
After this operation, 578 MB of additional disk space will be used.

It sure pays to hoard previously downloaded dotDeb archive files when
you're on dialup!

Cindy :)
-- 
Cindy-Sue Causey
Talking Rock, Pickens County, Georgia, USA

* runs with duct tape *

Re: Warning: Debian/testing full-upgrade removes security packages!

[likcoras]

On 07/15/2018 02:49 PM, Hans wrote:
> be warned: Wheh you do apt full-upgrade, then most security tools, we rely 
> on, 
> are deinstallesd. These are rkhunter, chrootkit, autopsy, tripwire, 
> needrestart and tiger. Also forensics-full and forensics-all are deinstalled 
> (however, this might have other reasons).

Most likely the upgrade is changing packages that are depended on by the
packages you mention. Just re-install them. Just examine which packages
are being changed, see why apt wants to uninstall, and reinstall if needed.

> This is no good behaviour, and it looks for me like the preparation for a 
> global attack on debian. 

The extent of the evidence that supports the idea that this is in fact
an attack on Debian is just that apt is removing these packages on
update. This behavior could be explained by other means, without first
jumping to conclusions about NSA interference.

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by
stupidity." or, in this case, basically any simpler explanation than
"the preparation for a global attack on debian".

I believe it would have been more helpful if this had been written as a
question on why apt might be removing said packages on upgrade, with
more context, instead of spreading FUD on the list.

Re: Debian got too fat?

[Reco]

Hi.

On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 12:16:20PM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> Hi folks,
> 
> would you mind to take a look at
> 
>   https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=888743
> 
> The fix is pretty easy.

But does not address all the cornercases, IMO.
Consider, for instance, an LXC container which shares root filesystem
with the host.


> Whats really bugging me is that nobody
> dares to touch the complex code of lsb-base. IMHO this is a clear
> indication that Debian lost the blessed path other Unixes do follow.

Agreed. Debian drifted away from LSB several years ago, so the lack of
maintainers' interest is sad, but is to be expected.


> What is your suggestion here? Apply the patch I provided (or maybe a
> better one), or get rid of lsb-base completely?

Aim to ditch lsb-base in the long run.
For here and now I'd used something like 'pgrep -x --ns 1
$DAEMON_EXECUTABLE' instead of pidof.

Reco

[SOLVED] Re: apt-get update hangs forever

[deloptes]

Carl Fink wrote:

> May we assume you tried switching repos? Because the only times I've
> seen that, a particular repository was unreachable.

no, I have not switched anything, but your answer helped me rewind the tape
back and yes I have added one source (Signal) by myself and the stupid
skype package adds it's source each time you install it, so I removed both
and now it works. I would bet it hangs on the Signal source.

thank you very much for the hint

regards

Re: apt-get update hangs forever

[Carl Fink]

On 07/15/2018 06:27 AM, deloptes wrote:

Hi
on one of my machines apt-get update hangs forever.


Get:32 http://ftp.at.debian.org/debian stretch/non-free i386 Packages [69.7
kB]
Get:33 http://ftp.at.debian.org/debian stretch/non-free Translation-en [80.6
kB]
0% [Working]

What can I do to understand the reason and to solve it?

thanks


May we assume you tried switching repos? Because the only times I've
seen that, a particular repository was unreachable.

--
Carl Fink  c...@finknetwork.com
Thinking and logic and stuff at Reasonably Literate
http://reasonablyliterate.com

Re: Thunderbird always launching 2 copies.

[Carl Fink]

On 07/15/2018 12:54 AM, Octopus Octopus wrote:

Heyo,


I'm having this confusing bug where I launch thunderbird and it instead
launches 2 copies of it, I originally had an extra .desktop file for the
thunderbird-beta deleting it had no effect.


Does it do that if you launch Thunderbird from the command line,
instead of by clicking a link? What is the result of
'which thunderbird'?

--
Carl Fink  c...@finknetwork.com
Thinking and logic and stuff at Reasonably Literate
http://reasonablyliterate.com

apt-get update hangs forever

[deloptes]

Hi
on one of my machines apt-get update hangs forever.


Get:32 http://ftp.at.debian.org/debian stretch/non-free i386 Packages [69.7
kB]
Get:33 http://ftp.at.debian.org/debian stretch/non-free Translation-en [80.6
kB]
0% [Working]   

What can I do to understand the reason and to solve it?

thanks  

Debian got too fat?

[Harald Dunkel]

Hi folks,

would you mind to take a look at

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=888743

The fix is pretty easy. Whats really bugging me is that nobody
dares to touch the complex code of lsb-base. IMHO this is a clear
indication that Debian lost the blessed path other Unixes do follow.

What is your suggestion here? Apply the patch I provided (or maybe a
better one), or get rid of lsb-base completely?


Regards
Harri

Re: Wrapping lines, was Re: BTRFS and debian

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 01:23:36PM +1000, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 10:10:01PM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > On Sat 14 Jul 2018 at 19:50:03 (+1000), Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 05:59:58PM -0700, David Christensen wrote:
> > > > ZFS is killer technology.  zfs-fuse is sawed off.  ZOL rocks, but the 
> > > > license keeps it out of Debian.  We'll see if
> > > > and when btrfs catches up.
> > > 
> > > (Do you know why your mail client (or perhaps server) wraps at 115
> > > chars? 72 or 69 or even 80 would be much better...)
> > 
> > Your own mail client is doing this. You need to find out how to set
> > the wrapping value. In mutt, you might add the line
> > 
> > set reflow_wrap=80
> 
> Sweet!
> 
> Very informative. Daŋkə schön :)

Ahh yes, now I remember, I set reflow_wrap to 69 originally, then
added the sidebar, and mutt has a bug where the sidebar width is
included in the reflow width. But some weeks (months?) ago I removed
the sidebar, so must again change reflow_wrap.

Thanks heaps,