[Bug 1949605] Re: Backport Thunderbird 91 to 20.04 LTS and 18.04 LTS
I had noticed, on packages.ubuntu.com/thunderbird -- that the new 91.5 wasn't on all architectures, however it is now. Potentially I was noticing what is still the case, that base versions of distro focal,hirsute,impish have an old version in [ports] but an updated single version in -updates on all arches confusingly!. In any case, all seems to be good now,... Hoping situation improved for being able to release new series more easily in future etc. With thanks!. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1949605 Title: Backport Thunderbird 91 to 20.04 LTS and 18.04 LTS To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1949605/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1949605] Re: Backport Thunderbird 91 to 20.04 LTS and 18.04 LTS
Hrrm, I was about to test and then discovered package released already, though can say all is good so-far. I notice ports (e.g. arm64) not all getting new build... Hope situation is now improved for ongoing updates, at least. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1949605 Title: Backport Thunderbird 91 to 20.04 LTS and 18.04 LTS To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1949605/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1949605] Re: Backport Thunderbird 91 to 20.04 LTS and 18.04 LTS
Debian now have 91.5.0-2 in sid and seem to have long since sorted the portability/architecture issues. @osomon -- Please let us all have a test-package for Ubuntu update testing. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1949605 Title: Backport Thunderbird 91 to 20.04 LTS and 18.04 LTS To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1949605/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1949605] Re: Backport Thunderbird 91 to 20.04 LTS and 18.04 LTS
Thunderbird (and Firefox-ESR) 91.4 has been released by Debian with no problems, I believe either current or LTS or both had another package updated in order to support these updates, though I can't seem to find which it is now. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1949605 Title: Backport Thunderbird 91 to 20.04 LTS and 18.04 LTS To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1949605/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1949605] Re: Backport Thunderbird 91 to 20.04 LTS and 18.04 LTS
Both debian and ubuntu seem to have some sort of problem with Thunderbird not managing to build on all architectures, or so, in the latest versions in packages. databases. I notice launchpad has built 91.3.0 packages for ubuntu jamil (presumably equivalent to debian sid or so)... Do let us all know about any 'testing' packages ready to try out =). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1949605 Title: Backport Thunderbird 91 to 20.04 LTS and 18.04 LTS To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1949605/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1949605] Re: Backport Thunderbird 91 to 20.04 LTS and 18.04 LTS
For what its' worth, the Focal system's provided packages do not meet the following build-deps of the *debian* Thunderbird 91.3.0 package;- cbindgen (>= 0.19) debhelper-compat (= 13) libnspr4-dev (>= 2:4.32~) libnss3-dev (>= 2:3.68~) nodejs (>= 10.19.0) Merely overriding the version dependencies in debian control file [which can just automatically referring to latest version needlessly] is not sufficient, an internal check *actually* requires e.g. nspr >=4.32 . These packages may need backporting or whatever, or the ubuntu packages may work differently to get around these limitations for building (in any case build-deps and runtime-deps may be another matter...). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1949605 Title: Backport Thunderbird 91 to 20.04 LTS and 18.04 LTS To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1949605/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1895643] Re: Backport Thunderbird 78 to 20.04 LTS and 18.04 LTS
For what it is worth, this problem is now back -- very soon need the Thunderbird 91.3 installed into Ubuntu as 78.x is about at EOL. Debian have already prepared their packages in Sid (91.2.1 and 91.3.x no doubt shortly to follow). They also offer firefox-esr and do similar work with that packaging. I recall there was a suggestion/bug/discussion about sharing resources on ESR for at least Thunderbird, to save duplicate resources, not sure where that got to. I am writing to this bug just to notify likely-relevant people, but if this isn't happening and needs a bug-report, please start a new bug report and link it to this bug, as this has got long and complex already!. With many thanks, -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1895643 Title: Backport Thunderbird 78 to 20.04 LTS and 18.04 LTS To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/enigmail/+bug/1895643/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1926937] Re: [SRU] Virtualbox new release 6.1.26
virtualbox-dkms binary package comes from the same source package virtualbox. See https://packages.ubuntu.com/source/focal-updates/virtualbox -- this is a one-to-many mapping. virtualbox-ext-pack and virtualbox-guest-additions-iso are separate. In any case, al the 6.1.26 packages for 20.04 LTS have reached focal- proposed and are installable and seem to work, in short, more testing to do! =). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1926937 Title: [SRU] Virtualbox new release 6.1.26 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/virtualbox/+bug/1926937/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1897962] Re: Out of Memory Error with Brother DCP-J7720W
I can further confirm that this escl buggy driver affects other scanners, e.g. Epson XP-830 just to name *one* but there are endless Escl network printers/scanners these days. Using the PPA:- https://launchpad.net/~sane-project/+archive/ubuntu/sane-release version 1.0.32 *does* work a lot better!. I have really come to the conclusion that the sane-release PPA is very backwards-compatible with all the existing software-tools, simple-scan, xsane, skanlite, libreoffice, xscanimage, gimp, gscan2pdf, ... in all cases I have tested, the 1.0.32 sane-release ppa version of sane backends works the same or better as the focal 1.0.29 version without requiring any software to be re-compiled. 'gscan2pdf' is notably more functional than simple-scan in terms of being able to auto-rotate back- sides of scanned auto-feed pages. The trouble comes, helping users without having to do all sorts of searching and having to 'find out' bugs hard way Can a new point- release of focal provide sane-backends and sane-airscan backported, well-tested packages? As to when to get users ipp-usb (or not) installed, is another matter entirely, that also matters. For some ipp-usb makes the scanning work well, for other cases not, needs to be NOT running to support legacy scanner drivers!... I suspect for 22.04 ipp-usb should be provided by default. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1897962 Title: Out of Memory Error with Brother DCP-J7720W To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sane-backends/+bug/1897962/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1895643] Re: Backport Thunderbird 78 to 20.04 LTS and 18.04 LTS
** Changed in: thunderbird (Ubuntu Bionic) Status: Triaged => Confirmed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1895643 Title: Backport Thunderbird 78 to 20.04 LTS and 18.04 LTS To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1895643/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1895643] Re: Backport Thunderbird 78 to 20.04 LTS and 18.04 LTS
** Changed in: jsunit (Ubuntu Bionic) Status: New => Confirmed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1895643 Title: Backport Thunderbird 78 to 20.04 LTS and 18.04 LTS To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1895643/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1895643] Re: Backport Thunderbird 78 to 20.04 LTS and 18.04 LTS
For those curious, focal unapproved-queue is here:- https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/focal/+queue?queue_state=1 I notice on the linked ubuntu security team ppa, now is 78.7.1+build1-0ubuntu0.20.04.1 in fact... -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1895643 Title: Backport Thunderbird 78 to 20.04 LTS and 18.04 LTS To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1895643/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1895643] Re: Backport Thunderbird 78 to 20.04 LTS and 18.04 LTS
Although in this bug, marked 'fix committed' for focal a while now, I can't find the new thunderbird package in either focal-proposed nor focal-security . Also not shown on https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/focal/+queue Any ideas? -- be useful to see what package queues/links should be known about, and in any case, what happened to the committed fix. With thanks!. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1895643 Title: Backport Thunderbird 78 to 20.04 LTS and 18.04 LTS To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1895643/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1724872] Re: nvidia-graphics-drivers-340 340.102-0ubuntu0.16.04.2 ADT test failure with linux-hwe-edge 4.13.0-16.19~16.04.3
** Changed in: nvidia-graphics-drivers-340 (Ubuntu) Status: In Progress => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1724872 Title: nvidia-graphics-drivers-340 340.102-0ubuntu0.16.04.2 ADT test failure with linux-hwe-edge 4.13.0-16.19~16.04.3 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nvidia-graphics-drivers-340/+bug/1724872/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1886114] Re: package samba-common-bin 2:4.11.6+dfsg-0ubuntu1.3 failed to install/upgrade: installed samba-common-bin package post-installation script subprocess returned error exit status 1
The pathway by which this error can occur, is installing package "samba-common-bin" on focal20.04 with no previous samba installation ... -- although there is a /usr/lib/tmpfiles.d/samba.conf installed, the package installer seems to end up creating the above error due to not having /run/samba when trying to start something samba-related using smb.conf provided in samba-common... Appears, this particular state can be workarounded by manually creating /run/samba then installing samba-common-bin, then on next reboot /run/samba is created automatically and error does not recur... ** Changed in: samba (Ubuntu) Status: Expired => Confirmed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1886114 Title: package samba-common-bin 2:4.11.6+dfsg-0ubuntu1.3 failed to install/upgrade: installed samba-common-bin package post-installation script subprocess returned error exit status 1 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/samba/+bug/1886114/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1901829] Re: thunderbird fails to open, xml parse error
This seems to be related to important suggestion to merge packaging efforts as best as possible:- https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1894090 ...Not sure if merging-efforts will help with this specific bug, or otherwise, Debian can be learned-from somehow-or-other!. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1901829 Title: thunderbird fails to open, xml parse error To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1901829/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1910709] Re: DKMS linux-headers-5.8.0-34-generic update brokes nvidia-340
@Meluco I don't in any way think nvidia-340 likely to affect wifi, but test your wifi on all the kernels, especially 5.4.0-62-generic and 5.8.0-38-generic. Do hold down shift early at system startup to get in GRUB boot menu (exact timing depends upon system), you should be able to get into "Advanced options for Ubuntu" and boot with different kernels. Seems like nvidia-340 likely to work in all cases, you seem to have dkms compiled for all. If there is a kernel<>wifi issue in current 5.8.0-38 or 5.4.0-62-generic please search for that bug / report that bug separately to this bug, note what kernels it does/doesn't work with, and so-on. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1910709 Title: DKMS linux-headers-5.8.0-34-generic update brokes nvidia-340 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nvidia-graphics-drivers-340/+bug/1910709/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1872950] Re: Nvidia 340.108 fails to install with kernels 5.5 onward
As per tjaalton's link -- new nvidia-340 in focal-proposed for 20.04 users:- https://launchpad.net/bugs/1910709 Needs testing, especially for regressions for those still on Kernel 5.4. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1872950 Title: Nvidia 340.108 fails to install with kernels 5.5 onward To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nvidia-graphics-drivers-340/+bug/1872950/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1895643] Re: Backport Thunderbird 78 to 20.04 LTS and 18.04 LTS
This appears to be imminent update-release for groovy and focal users, packages available:- https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-mozilla-security/+archive/ubuntu/ppa/+packages Apparently, 'fix committed' in part, which presumably means focal-proposed package now here:- https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/focal/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1895643 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1895643 Title: Backport Thunderbird 78 to 20.04 LTS and 18.04 LTS To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1895643/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1910709] Re: DKMS linux-headers-5.8.0-34-generic update brokes nvidia-340
@ihler [and same comment may apply to others...] How have you ended up with -hwe kernel getting installed anyhow? Default behaviour of particular install iso image? Because clicked some option somewhere? Some sort of 'unintended/accident' and only later found the consequence of k5.8 auto-installing? Using a non-standard ubuntu install image? This situation will need investigating as we don't want similar mess occurring in another 6months when following HWE kernel goes into 18.04.3 and so-on!... I'd prefer that 20.04.2 provided users option to install with kernel 5.4LTS and stay there for older hardware. I note, ubuntu-derivative LinuxMint have decided to do this and not by-default follow the HWE chain, but providing an initial -edge image with kernel 5.8 for those who really need it. May be better that those on older hardware move back to LTS 5.4 kernel and not keep following HWE? May be that legacy drivers can still be bought forward to further HWE kernels all the way to the final HWE series...? We will see, I guess, but I'd like to see these breakages/messes avoided ongoing. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1910709 Title: DKMS linux-headers-5.8.0-34-generic update brokes nvidia-340 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nvidia-graphics-drivers-340/+bug/1910709/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1910709] Re: DKMS linux-headers-5.8.0-34-generic update brokes nvidia-340
Also: For those stuck without Nvidia working on k5.8 -- simple short- term thing to do, is hold down SHIFT at system startup (exact timing depends upon system) to get to the GRUB boot-menu, and then select "Advanced options for Ubuntu" (or thereabouts) submenu and then you should be able to boot from the latest 5.4 kernel you should still have installed. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1910709 Title: DKMS linux-headers-5.8.0-34-generic update brokes nvidia-340 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nvidia-graphics-drivers-340/+bug/1910709/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1910709] Re: DKMS linux-headers-5.8.0-34-generic update brokes nvidia-340
For what its' worth, I built the nvidia-340_340.108-0ubuntu5 package (includes patches to go up to kernel 5.9 apparently) on Focal20.04 -- just using the groovy-updates version and renumbering it back to 20.04.0test0 instead of a 20.10. version. The full source and set of debs is here:- https://www.iremonger.me.uk/noidx/nvidia-340-focal/ You only seem to need the 'nvidia-340' deb [ https://www.iremonger.me.uk/noidx/nvidia-340-focal/nvidia-340_340.108-0ubuntu5.20.04.0test0_amd64.deb ] for basic usage of the driver, but the full set of debs and source package is provided above. This appears to solve the build and install problem on 20.04 based system, with ubuntu kernel 5.8 series installed. By all means use and test this if you like, I hope ubuntu-devs will put the same or equivalent into focal-proposed and focal-updates very soon!. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1910709 Title: DKMS linux-headers-5.8.0-34-generic update brokes nvidia-340 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nvidia-graphics-drivers-340/+bug/1910709/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1910709] Re: DKMS linux-headers-5.8.0-34-generic update brokes nvidia-340
** Changed in: nvidia-graphics-drivers-340 (Ubuntu) Status: Incomplete => Confirmed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1910709 Title: DKMS linux-headers-5.8.0-34-generic update brokes nvidia-340 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nvidia-graphics-drivers-340/+bug/1910709/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1910709] Re: DKMS linux-headers-5.8.0-34-generic update brokes nvidia-340
I can confirm that there is not yet a new 'nvidia-340' in focal-proposed. Looking at the changelogs this *should* be a very simple case of backporting existing gutsy-updates source to focal just naming it .20.04.1 on the end instead of 20.10.2, in short. I think this needs to be done promptly as affecting existing LTS desktop users with hwe metapackages installed! Would be nice to see patch support also k5.10 which is already packaged in debian, and provided in various 3rd-party-isos, but not if holding up immediate nvidia-340 update. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1910709 Title: DKMS linux-headers-5.8.0-34-generic update brokes nvidia-340 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nvidia-graphics-drivers-340/+bug/1910709/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1901904] Re: [SRU] virtualbox 6.1.10-dfsg-1~ubuntu1.20.04.1 ADT test failure with linux-hwe-5.8 5.8.0-25.26~20.04.1
I can confirm virtualbox-6.1.16-dfsg-6 packages (including -ext-pack and -guest-additions-iso) seem to be working well, even succeeds in 'resuming' a VM that was "saved" under 6.1.10 . Exercised many functions and having no issues as-yet. I tested against the focal-proposed kernel 5.4.0-61, very successfully!. I understand others have been trying the 5.8 kernels already (e.g. ubuntu 20.10). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1901904 Title: [SRU] virtualbox 6.1.10-dfsg-1~ubuntu1.20.04.1 ADT test failure with linux-hwe-5.8 5.8.0-25.26~20.04.1 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/liblzf/+bug/1901904/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1901904] Re: [SRU] virtualbox 6.1.10-dfsg-1~ubuntu1.20.04.1 ADT test failure with linux-hwe-5.8 5.8.0-25.26~20.04.1
@koparebu -- You will need liblzf1 manually downloaded too in order to manually download like that. In any case, once manually installed, unless you went out of your way to 'pin' or 'hold' the packages, apt/update-manager will happily "upgrade" them in future if they are superseded by newer packages in the repositories, so there is no need to be concerned. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1901904 Title: [SRU] virtualbox 6.1.10-dfsg-1~ubuntu1.20.04.1 ADT test failure with linux-hwe-5.8 5.8.0-25.26~20.04.1 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/liblzf/+bug/1901904/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1910709] Re: DKMS linux-headers-5.8.0-34-generic update brokes nvidia-340
@daniel-banobre-dopico Can you confirm this affects the 'released' (focal-updates) kernel 5.8.0-36-generic (install linux-generic-hwe-20.04) ? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1910709 Title: DKMS linux-headers-5.8.0-34-generic update brokes nvidia-340 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1910709/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1903848] Re: Latest kernel update to "5.4.0-53-generic" = Internal audio, USB webcam no longer working
@rivpelle There are quite a lot of Audio-fixes in Kernel 5.4.0-59-generic which is coming to 20.04LTS imminently, changelog here:- https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/vdw94dvHTy/ Additionally, it seems from focal-proposed packages, linux-generic- hwe-20.04 is about to cause install of 5.8.0-34-generic, on LTS ubuntu 20.04 -- i.e. support installing 5.8 kernel for hwe (new hardware enablement). Ideally, when 20.04.2 ubuntu image comes out next month, you can test booting this on your system (from DVD or USB etc, no need to install) and confirm the issue is fixed and then close the bug-report. Note your 20.10 will need to be updated to 21.04 and then 21.10 then 22.04 to remain supported (or, you may choose to re-install 20.04.2 at some point). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1903848 Title: Latest kernel update to "5.4.0-53-generic" = Internal audio, USB webcam no longer working To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-signed/+bug/1903848/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1813509] Re: [i915] NULL pointer on Linux 4.18.0-14-generic / cosmic
@illweckz Please try to close the bug as it seems to apply only to unsupported ubuntu versions and fixed on current LTS kernel (5.4). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1813509 Title: [i915] NULL pointer on Linux 4.18.0-14-generic / cosmic To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-signed/+bug/1813509/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1891682] Re: [MIR] sane-airscan
Fwiw, this is likely to be such a common usability problem, LinuxMint decided to provide more useful sane-airscan version directly in their repositories for mint20.1 based open focal20.04. https://github.com/linuxmint/linuxmint/issues/327 Since, Focal 20.04LTS does not have 'sane-airscan' package I think ubuntu should look at providing/backporting this more easily for focal users -- that is, not requiring a convoluted hidden process requiring manual search for bug-reports/PPAs, with no clue to the user this may be needed, and so-on. Any "Driver-manager" etc could assist with the sane-airscan adding / sane-backends+escl-backport options. ** Bug watch added: github.com/linuxmint/linuxmint/issues #327 https://github.com/linuxmint/linuxmint/issues/327 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1891682 Title: [MIR] sane-airscan To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sane-airscan/+bug/1891682/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1862926] Re: Request for update: SANE 1.0.29
For what its' worth, the sane escl is buggy even in 1.0.29, installing 1.0.31 improves matters !. Example bug/failure is here, but NOTE is not actually limited to the titled printer:- https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sane-backends/+bug/1897962 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1862926 Title: Request for update: SANE 1.0.29 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sane-backends/+bug/1862926/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1891682] Re: [MIR] sane-airscan
For what its' worth -- r.e. groovy release.. libsane1 (1.0.31-2) seems to include libsane-escl listed normally in dll.conf (i.e. likely a reasonable version of escl, better than focal known-buggy version). sane-airscan 0.99.15-1 is in gusty universe, so will require an SRU in order to be changed to 0.99.18 etc. Not sure how much difference that makes [maybe maintainer can comment!]. Not clear to me that installing sane-airscan package will 'just work' to take-over from escl when installed, by default (or if manual modding dll.conf needed), however. Maybe, the way this works, is such that users will see scanner listed twice, both driver options offered, or maybe airscan should take over escl if installed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1891682 Title: [MIR] sane-airscan To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sane-airscan/+bug/1891682/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1897962] Re: Out of Memory Error with Brother DCP-J7720W
>From what I can tell, actually the escl buggy driver affects a wide range of Brother, Canon, Epson, HP, Ricoh, Xerox, apple-protocol scanners .., although Mick reported his specific scanner, indications from sane devs and from debian bugs and other anecdotes suggest 'escl' 1.0.29 problems rather more widespread. I really do think this is a special (and important) case for an LTS- distro, as MANY scanner manufacturers have taken up the airscan protocol and this provides a much easier scanning integration than lots of the individual protocols that came before. I do think this is doing a serious dis-service to Ubuntu LTS users, not to even modify the packages to produce a Warning message pointing at the correct fix, when escl module gets used, even if no extra package formally in focal. I do think it would be fair to get input from sane-devs etc... they too may be able to clarify how wide-spread issues are. I appreciate this may need to be looked at after Groovy released and after escl/airscan modules a bit further matured, etc, but I do strongly suspect not attending to this in some manner is going to perpetuate an increasing usability-headache, lots of duplicate bug reports, and so-on, throughout the life of focal LTS. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1897962 Title: Out of Memory Error with Brother DCP-J7720W To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sane-backends/+bug/1897962/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1460447] Re: Boot slow, "scanning for btrfs filesystems" takes 100 seconds
I can confirm my specific failure was fixed with kernel 5.4.0-48 ... Question for original reporter Dan -- is this issue (slow btrfs scanning) still occuring for you? Now fixed? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1460447 Title: Boot slow, "scanning for btrfs filesystems" takes 100 seconds To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1460447/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1897962] Re: Out of Memory Error with Brother DCP-J7720W
Just for completeness, Mick (original reporting on issue in different forum) said:- $ scanimage -L device `escl:http://192.168.1.94:80' is a ESCL Brother DCP-J772DW flatbed scanner $ scanimage -T Output format is not set, using pnm as a default. Capability : [(null)] Capability : [image/jpeg] scanimage: rounded value of br-x from 0 to 0 scanimage: rounded value of br-y from 0 to 0 scanimage: sane_start: Invalid argument and similar error with $ scanimage > image.pnm and similar with Gscan2PDF. Bottom line is, escl driver bugs are going to affect a lot of Epson and apple AirScan protocol scanners. Debian bugs and upstream reports all explain wider issues with escl driver. I think it will be worth re-visiting the Backport idea after Gutsy has been out and tested for a while. PPA's have the problem they will keep being subjected to ongoing-changes and new breakages and so-on ...!. I can see there is a fundamental difficulty that drivers are not packaged separately and so difficult to backport a particular driver (escl driver being SRU'ed would be nice...). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1897962 Title: Out of Memory Error with Brother DCP-J7720W To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sane-backends/+bug/1897962/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1460447] Re: Boot slow, "scanning for btrfs filesystems" takes 100 seconds
OK Turns out my btrfs+floppy bug is indeed a kernel floppy matter, and
the btrfs scan just 'triggers' the fault.
The new kernel floppy maintainer says:-
This patch should fix the problem:
263c61581a38 ("block/floppy: fix contended case in floppy_queue_rq()")
The commit id in stable tree is 29ed45653bec.
> ubuntu kernel 5.4.0-42-generic
I think that these versions don't contain the fix. The fix is in the
5.4 kernel since 5.4.47 version.
SO, looks like my related comment is a red-herring and (should) be fixed
by routine updates to 5.4.0 ubuntu kernel updates!.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1460447
Title:
Boot slow, "scanning for btrfs filesystems" takes 100 seconds
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1460447/+subscriptions
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1460447] Re: Boot slow, "scanning for btrfs filesystems" takes 100 seconds
I can further confirm that taking out the btrfs scan in /usr/share /initramfs-tools/scripts/local-premount/btrfs fixes the intermittent boot issue for me. For me, this causes some deadlock between btfs scan and floppy driver and requires reboot, not just slow!. This may be a case of 'separate bug needed' . -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1460447 Title: Boot slow, "scanning for btrfs filesystems" takes 100 seconds To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1460447/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1460447] Re: Boot slow, "scanning for btrfs filesystems" takes 100 seconds
This issue, or variant thereof, has been observed on Ubuntu 20.04 and Linux Mint 20. I'm not 100% sure yet but it SEEMS to be affecting systems with a floppy drive. Can end up with bootup-messages:- [timestamp] Btrfs loaded, crc32c=crc32c-generic Scanning for Btrfs filesystems [timestamp] floppy0: floppy_queue_rq: timeout handler died. old request running removing 'btrfs-progs' (which then removes from initrd) works around the issue reliably. I need to double-check, i think kernel command line modprobe.blacklist=floppy can also workaround issue. Last I checked, I didn't find this to be specific to a particular kernel/series. Certainly experienced this on totally different hardwre, e.g. an intel core-2-duo in compaq Dx2300, but also on a completely different HP motherboard AMD64 machine/chipset. From what I can see this is not particular hardware specific either!. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1460447 Title: Boot slow, "scanning for btrfs filesystems" takes 100 seconds To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1460447/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1460447] Re: Boot slow, "scanning for btrfs filesystems" takes 100 seconds
Oh, and to be clear, both said machines floppy working properly! Not just faulty drive giving timeouts. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1460447 Title: Boot slow, "scanning for btrfs filesystems" takes 100 seconds To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1460447/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1876238] Re: [Dell Inspiron 1525, SigmaTel STAC9228] No sound at all. Internal Speaker Not Detected. Dummy Output. After Upgrading From 19.10 to 20.04 LTS Focal
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1876065 *** https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1876065 Have observed what appears to be this same bug, on a Dell Latitude D620 laptop!. E.g. using a live-usb, Speakers do not work (though headphones plugged in 3.5mm headphone-jack do!) until pulseaudio updated from (1:13.99.1-1ubuntu3) -> (1:13.99.1-1ubuntu3.5) and restart session. Hopefully this remains 'sorted out' for now... --Simon -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1876238 Title: [Dell Inspiron 1525, SigmaTel STAC9228] No sound at all. Internal Speaker Not Detected. Dummy Output. After Upgrading From 19.10 to 20.04 LTS Focal To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/alsa-driver/+bug/1876238/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1882217] Re: [SRU] virtualbox 5.2.*
FWIW, upstream just released *likely* final version 5.2.44:- VirtualBox 5.2.44 (released July 14 2020) This is a maintenance release. The following items were fixed and/or added: API: Fix unintentionally enabled audio due to a settings file version dependent bug VBoxManage: Fix crash of 'VBoxManage internalcommands repairhd' when processing invalid input (bug #19579) Reportedly, if any last-minute bug reports come in for this final month of upstream support, 5.2 and 6.0 could have a further final update, otherwise this is likely end-of-the-line... -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1882217 Title: [SRU] virtualbox 5.2.* To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/virtualbox/+bug/1882217/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1871049] Re: FFe: darktable 2.6.3 in focal needs update to 3.0.1
Thankyou for helpful answer, from what I can see new-features are minor, and there are likely to be many significant bugfixes ongoing that will need including one way or another. In any case, I note neither focal 3.0.1-0ubuntu1 package, nor debian-unstable 3.0.2-1 package succeed in compiling atop bionic18.04 system... In both cases all the apparent dependencies can be satisfied (e.g. backported debhelper, likely nothing else apparently needing backporting). Definitely worth making some PPAs with a view to bionic-backports in my view!. Can create a separate bug-report if needbe. With many thanks, -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1871049 Title: FFe: darktable 2.6.3 in focal needs update to 3.0.1 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/darktable/+bug/1871049/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1871049] Re: FFe: darktable 2.6.3 in focal needs update to 3.0.1
FWIW, Upstream and Debian-"unstable" have now released 3.0.2 ... May be worth Updating now, in any-case keep an eye on upstream bug-fixes ongoing... -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1871049 Title: FFe: darktable 2.6.3 in focal needs update to 3.0.1 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/darktable/+bug/1871049/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1819045] Re: vboxweb in 5.2.18-dfsg-2~ubuntu18.04.3 ignores VBOXWEB_HOST ip in /etc/default/virtualbox
Bionic-proposed repository, now has Virtualbox 5.2.32 in there... Can you confirm this fixes the above issue over the bionic 5.2.18 version? If not, it may be possible (if hurry!) to get the community maintainer/updater to fix that issue in proposed update as well. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1819045 Title: vboxweb in 5.2.18-dfsg-2~ubuntu18.04.3 ignores VBOXWEB_HOST ip in /etc/default/virtualbox To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/virtualbox/+bug/1819045/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1835576] Re: virtualbox-guest-dkms-hwe 5.2.18-dfsg-3~ubuntu18.04.3 fails to build on 5.0 based kernels [In function ‘VBoxGuest_RTR0MemUserIsValidAddr’: error: macro "access_ok" passed 3 arguments
I can confirm Virtualbox 5.2.32 working at least as well as 5.2.18, but now builds on newer kernels. I note this also fixes some security vulnerabilities. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1835576 Title: virtualbox-guest-dkms-hwe 5.2.18-dfsg-3~ubuntu18.04.3 fails to build on 5.0 based kernels [In function ‘VBoxGuest_RTR0MemUserIsValidAddr’: error: macro "access_ok" passed 3 arguments, but takes just 2] To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/virtualbox/+bug/1835576/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1758023] Re: Mouse acceleration not configurable in Xubuntu 18.04
FWIW this seems to be the same as issue:- https://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?t=272956 Also known to affect MATE not just xfce ... Seems like issue in this evdev<>libinput underpinning x.org infrastructure, likely? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1758023 Title: Mouse acceleration not configurable in Xubuntu 18.04 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xfce4-settings/+bug/1758023/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1773157] Re: procps outdated network options, old syncookies, new ecn update please.
Right -- systemd have just-now agreed to set the change in their upstream systemd sysctl files :- https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/6f130e85c76cfc2c58ba31f90d2ac3800866c1dd I notice, however, that ubuntu's systemd pkg 'strips most those settings out', in 18.04 currently only carrying the 18.04 fq_codel switch-on in their sysctl.d I think, given what has been said, I would like to propose that I :- * Make a suggested text for a 10-network-bufferbloat.conf here in procps in 18.10 (hopefully-onwards, including suitable references/comments about BBR (which should be there but commented/not- enabled yet unless we are sure its' been fixed to respond to ECN notifications.). This text shall explain clearly these are deliberately being tested into 18.10 and where to report bugs. * Look at what ubuntu's systemd package towards 18.10 is importing in sysctl.d -- and likely suggest ubuntu 'taken out' entirely so procps is the 'one' location for these settings (i.e. no duplicate setting of qdisc=fq_codel in 2 different places). Some will want to boot ubuntu with OpenRC or upstart for whatever reasons and consistent-behaviour would be helpful... * Ask in the BBR community about tcp_congestion_control goings-on there, when they are ready for ECN-compatible BBR wider-deployment. * Then, as/when seems appropriate, suggest changes into upstream-debian and upstream-kernel on the defaults. @rbalint -- what do you think on this plan for the interim? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1773157 Title: procps outdated network options, old syncookies, new ecn update please. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/procps/+bug/1773157/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1773157] Re: procps outdated network options, old syncookies, new ecn update please.
It would appear that the path-of-least-resistance at present, is systemd, poettering which is what is (for systemd-booters) where fq_codel is getting turned-on in ubuntu. This raises a wider-issue about bringing systemd-provided sysctl- defaults into procps more widely [systemd has introduced many of these in its' own repository, but version in ubuntu-bionic has few, see /usr/lib/sysctl.d/ on a bionic system... ALSO I have discovered there are facts to be checked about "BBR" as default TCP congestion-control, which will also be desirable, but MAY still have immature/issues when ECN is used on a TCP connection as well [one suggestion BBR doesn't react to ECN notifications]... I'm trying to get 'evidence' and 'facts' in that regard, which seem to be sparse and hard-to-find ... I'm going to (try) to get more facts before suggesting patches with reasons/evidence a few places. Agree entirely debian and upstream worth trying to ask, etc. HOWEVER its' often very useful to have had a change introduced in a 'non-lts' or 'testing' distibution like ubuntu-non-LTS releases so you can say how it works and had some testing/exposure somewhere first... It may be I come back to you and suggest a delta in ubuntu "for now" for good reason. We will see. Thankyou for helpful and promising-sounding response!. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1773157 Title: procps outdated network options, old syncookies, new ecn update please. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/procps/+bug/1773157/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1601997] Re: Ubuntu 16.10+ installer uses ext4 feature 'metadata_csum' which is incompatible with older (LTS) e2fsprogs
FWIW: e2fsprogs PPA created and discussion of backports/updates should happen on this linked-bug:- https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/e2fsprogs/+bug/1365874 -- if you are interested in xenial/older e2fsprogs compatibility please subscribe to that bug #1365874 . I also spotted e2fsprogs 1.44.2 has fix against crashing from malicious- filesystems, remains to be seen if this and further future fixes may ultimately warrant update to bionic's 1.44.1 . -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1601997 Title: Ubuntu 16.10+ installer uses ext4 feature 'metadata_csum' which is incompatible with older (LTS) e2fsprogs To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/e2fsprogs/+bug/1601997/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1365874] Re: Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, 14.04 LTS, 16.04 LTS do not support ext4 metadata checksumming
Here is the PPA for all architectures, please test :- https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-iremonger/+archive/ubuntu/e2fsprogs-xenial That is currently a backport of the version in bionic release itself, but maintains the xenial mke2fs.conf defaults [creating filesystems without 64bit,metadata_csum] for compatibility. I notice e2fsprogs in cosmic [1.44.2] introduces an anti-crash-fix [filesystems designed to crash e2fsck!]. Exactly what versions should then be considered for xenial-backports and xenial-updates, and if any updates to bionic should also be considered, is another matter!. Debian already have 1.44.2 backported to stretch (their current LTS release), for example. "-updates" versions might not, for example, want to update the comerr development headers and other potential compatibility regression areas, who knows?. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1365874 Title: Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, 14.04 LTS, 16.04 LTS do not support ext4 metadata checksumming To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/e2fsprogs/+bug/1365874/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1365874] Re: Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, 14.04 LTS, 16.04 LTS do not support ext4 metadata checksumming
Marc, Briefly just to let you know I'm working on a PPA for bionic e2fsprogs backport to xenial, will update when thats' ready. Turns out that:- (a) Ubuntu devs are rather tied-up fixing bionic18.04 bugs, and (b) to do a good SRU would need much regression-testing and somebody to push it forwards. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1365874 Title: Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, 14.04 LTS, 16.04 LTS do not support ext4 metadata checksumming To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/e2fsprogs/+bug/1365874/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1101779] Re: autofs "lookup_mount: exports lookup" fails on IPv6-only hosts
@ahasenack Andreas, your linked-bug has supposedly been fixed, can you check this autofs bug has therefore also been fixed and comment-further or close again...? Be good to get this sorted-out before 18.04.1, with thanks!. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1101779 Title: autofs "lookup_mount: exports lookup" fails on IPv6-only hosts To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/autofs/+bug/1101779/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 940541] Re: [needs-packaging] Bufferbloat: Ubuntu doesn't come with bufferbloat fixes
Launchpad issue link didn't come out -- LP #1773157 https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/procps/+bug/1773157 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/940541 Title: [needs-packaging] Bufferbloat: Ubuntu doesn't come with bufferbloat fixes To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/940541/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1436945] Re: devel: consider fq_codel as the default qdisc for networking
Launchpad issue link didn't come out -- LP #1773157 https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/procps/+bug/1773157 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1436945 Title: devel: consider fq_codel as the default qdisc for networking To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1436945/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 940541] Re: [needs-packaging] Bufferbloat: Ubuntu doesn't come with bufferbloat fixes
A lot of comments here seem outdated, however things have moved on in a good-way! Taking reference of https://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/bloat/wiki/Linux_Tips/ -- would now seem that many of the bufferbloat fixes HAVE been implemented -- Upstream kernel changes have now introduced tcp_sack tcp_dsack seemingly. Systemd, interestingly-enough, now enables fq_codel as default qdisc. [See LP #1436945 ]. The remaining piece of this bufferbloat puzzle on desktop distributions, seems to be turning on tcp_ecn fully so that it actually gets used on outgoing TCP connections (with adaptive fallback now supported). See related Issue: #1773157 -- Please support this and mark as affecting you as you see fit! Also: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/9087 Hope that helps! ** Bug watch added: github.com/systemd/systemd/issues #9087 https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/9087 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/940541 Title: [needs-packaging] Bufferbloat: Ubuntu doesn't come with bufferbloat fixes To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/940541/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1436945] Re: devel: consider fq_codel as the default qdisc for networking
Interestingly, turns out that seemingly systemd is what is (currently) responsible for turning on fq_codel by default. See:- https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/e6c253e363dee77ef7e5c5f44c4ca55cded3fd47 Be nice to then get that suggested into upstream linux as a default and/or procps for 'non-systemd' booting. Also see #1773157 -- ECN really needs to be properly enabled to give the best benefit for congestion with TCP streams present. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1436945 Title: devel: consider fq_codel as the default qdisc for networking To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1436945/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1773157] Re: procps outdated network options, old syncookies, new ecn update please.
(fwiw, fq_codel queuing is now being turned-on in bionic (at least) by systemd, confusingly!). https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/e6c253e363dee77ef7e5c5f44c4ca55cded3fd47 Possibly, turning on ECN might more likely happen there first, but I would like the procps updated for those using upstart or otherwise). This seems to be the last piece of bufferbloat puzzle (see LP bug #1436945 ). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1773157 Title: procps outdated network options, old syncookies, new ecn update please. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/procps/+bug/1773157/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 940541] Re: [needs-packaging] Bufferbloat: Ubuntu doesn't come with bufferbloat fixes
** Changed in: ubuntu Assignee: (unassigned) => Simon Iremonger (ubuntu-iremonger) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/940541 Title: [needs-packaging] Bufferbloat: Ubuntu doesn't come with bufferbloat fixes To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/940541/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 57091] Re: proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_syncookies=1 should be seriously considered to permit SYN flood defense...
FWIW Although syncookies has long-since been enabled upstream, the outdated comments in sysctl about syncookies still persist, I have now created new ubuntu bug #1773157 [please comment there]. [This also requests ECN-on-outgoing enablement which has similarly matured etc.]. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/57091 Title: proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_syncookies=1 should be seriously considered to permit SYN flood defense... To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/procps/+bug/57091/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1436945] Re: devel: consider fq_codel as the default qdisc for networking
>From what I can see, updates in ubuntu have now fixed this, bionic system certainly seems to now be booting with /proc/sys/net/core/default_qdisc = fq_codel now!. Can somebody confirm this and close this bug as 'fixed' ? SECONDLY, Related bufferbloat-matter to make fq_codel work better to avoid packet-drops is outbound tcp ECN-enablement on ubuntu end-hosts -- please see related ubuntu bug #1773157 and mark/comment there please:- https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/procps/+bug/1773157 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1436945 Title: devel: consider fq_codel as the default qdisc for networking To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1436945/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1773157] [NEW] procps outdated network options, old syncookies, new ecn update please.
Public bug reported: The ubuntu version of procps carries it's own /etc/sysctl.d/10-network- security.conf file explicitly that appears not to be part of debian procps version. Firstly, the section about "# Turn on SYN-flood protections." (came from LP #57091 ) is now entirely outdated, upstream kernel has long since turned on syncookies by default, so setting this flag explicitly in 10-network-security.conf is entirely redundant likely since before ubuntu-14.04 . I would like the ubuntu-maintainer to remove that section entirely in cosmic onwards. [I am going to report debian the similarly outdated syncookies comments in sysctl.conf itself]. Secondly, I propose a new 10-network-tuning.conf with:- == # Allow ECN for outgoing connections. Starting with 4.2, there is an adaptive # fallback [enabled by default tcp_ecn_fallback option] preventing connection # loss even with ecn enabled, also ecn-intolerance is increasingly very rare. net.ipv4.tcp_ecn=1 == I know there is a (small) chance of issues/regressions with ECN enabled by default on outgoing but I'm quite sure the issue is very rare, like others notice [ref: 1 and 2 below]. Apple's selective enablements etc. show this works just as much as my own use for years and many similar reports. ECN actually being used for outgoing connections really helps with latency-reduction with modern routers (both core and edge) using queuing disciplines fq_codel or otherwise, able to mark rather than drop packets on ECN-enabled flows [helps latency and realtime applications]. Now we are just past LTS release is in my view the 'right time' to finally enable ECN [and obviously easy to revert!]. If this is disputed, in ANY case I strongly suggest at the very least a commented-out ECN section should be included, but 'defaults matter'!. I was going to suggest a non-default section about net.core.default_qdisc [ LP #1436945 ] but this appears to have been fixed upstream similarly. [1] https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/98/slides/slides-98-maprg-tcp-ecn-experience-with-enabling-ecn-on-the-internet-padma-bhooma-00.pdf [2] http://seclists.org/nanog/2015/Jun/675 ** Affects: procps (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1773157 Title: procps outdated network options, old syncookies, new ecn update please. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/procps/+bug/1773157/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1365874] Re: Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, 14.04 LTS, 16.04 LTS do not support ext4 metadata checksumming
HOWEVER, Trusty e2fsprogs backporting situation actually seems to be that, some change between 1.43.3-1~bpo8+1 and 1.43.4-2 is where the trusty-incompatibility has accrued, 1.43.9-2 does NOT build on trusty! :- https://www.iremonger.me.uk/noidx/e2fs/e2fsprogs-1.43.9_trusty_build-fail.log A simple patch to the 'debian/control' file adding the explicit '-dbg' package entries on the end *APPEARS* to solve all the problems, and allows 1.43.9 [or 1.44.0 for that matter!] to SEEMINGLY build fine, pass all tests, and work fine on trusty without any issues I can find so-far!:- https://www.iremonger.me.uk/noidx/e2fs/e2fsprogs-1.43.9_trusty_debian-control.patch https://www.iremonger.me.uk/noidx/e2fs/e2fsprogs-1.44.0_trusty_debian-control.patch This all SEEMS to work fine, but I'd like tytso to comment on this, is this really a safe workaround or just 'fixing the symptom'. From what I can see all the right programs are generated and work fine. AGAIN, I'd highly recommend installing byte-for-byte the 'original' mke2fs.conf in any trusty-backport version of e2fsprogs, so as to avoid any unwanted behavioural-changes or configuration-file-update-prompts :-. https://www.iremonger.me.uk/noidx/e2fs/mke2fs.conf.trusty >From what I can SEE, if doing a significant backport to trusty, I can't see why not to just go straight to 1.44.0 in this case [again, hopefully tytso can comment!]. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1365874 Title: Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, 14.04 LTS, 16.04 LTS do not support ext4 metadata checksumming To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/e2fsprogs/+bug/1365874/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1365874] Re: Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, 14.04 LTS, 16.04 LTS do not support ext4 metadata checksumming
OK On further investigation, I have confirmed a lot of key-facts (1 of 2 linked comments). e2fsprogs 1.44.0-1 backports to xenial with no difficulty whatsoever, passes "make fullcheck" and works in every way I can tell, lots of resizing and checking and use within gparted, etc, all (apparently) behaving... HOWEVER, for an official xenial-backport (and especially xenial-SRU), to minimize possible problems, I would highly recommend making single change of restoring the 'default' mke2fs.conf EXACTLY (byte-for-byte) as that which came with xenial e2fsprogs 1.42.13-1ubuntu1 :- https://www.iremonger.me.uk/noidx/e2fs/mke2fs.conf.xenial This (a) avoids prompting users who've customized their mke2fs.conf about merging-changes, and (b) avoids functional-change for those with automated-deployment-scripts etc. based upon ext4 creation. I presume, a 'xenial-backport' -or- SRU "proposed" update can be started straight-away? xenial-SRU should DEFINITELY be considered for fsck compatibility with bionic-created FS. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1365874 Title: Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, 14.04 LTS, 16.04 LTS do not support ext4 metadata checksumming To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/e2fsprogs/+bug/1365874/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1756177] Re: FFe: e2fsprogs 1.44, support for largedir and ea_inode
FWIW 'this seems to WORK in bionic, including "make fullcheck" on the source, system able to check itself on boot, resizing other system disks, no issues so far as I can. Thankyou for agreeing//doing this so quickly. Backporting related matters to be discussed separately in:- https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/e2fsprogs/+bug/1365874 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1756177 Title: FFe: e2fsprogs 1.44, support for largedir and ea_inode To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/e2fsprogs/+bug/1756177/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1365874] Re: Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, 14.04 LTS, 16.04 LTS do not support ext4 metadata checksumming
e2fsprogs 1.44.0 for bionic18.04 has apparently been agreed:- https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/e2fsprogs/+bug/1756177 [launchpad build-logs suggest its' been built for PROPOSED but not yet seen it 'come through' as a package or appear on 'packages.ubuntu.com' ...]. Hopefully that will go through. Is the first-step thereafter, to then "xenial-backports" 1.44.0 and "trusty-backports" 1.43.9 ? -- I believe devs spoke of accepting an SRU (full stable-release-update) for xenial e2fsprogs, but I suspect backporting in first instance may be a good approach [?]. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1365874 Title: Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, 14.04 LTS, 16.04 LTS do not support ext4 metadata checksumming To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/e2fsprogs/+bug/1365874/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1365874] Re: Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, 14.04 LTS, 16.04 LTS do not support ext4 metadata checksumming
See linked bug 1601997, response seems to be to accept your 'new' defaults for ext4 in 18.04. I note, particularly -- your request about 1.44.0 inclusion doesn't yet seem to be addressed [maybe it requires a separate bug//issue] ;-(. Do expand on that point if you can. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1365874 Title: Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, 14.04 LTS, 16.04 LTS do not support ext4 metadata checksumming To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/e2fsprogs/+bug/1365874/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1601997] Re: Ubuntu 16.10+ installer uses ext4 feature 'metadata_csum' which is incompatible with older (LTS) e2fsprogs
Steve: Given what you say, can you consider Tytso's request to put 1.44.0 e2fsprogs into Bionic. This allows for not-enabled-by-default for support of 2 extra ext4 flags in e2fsprogs, thereby avoiding this situation happening again for 20.04 with respect to THOSE flags... As TJ- said, be good to get it in for LTS release from the off. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/e2fsprogs/+bug/1365874/comments/17 [maybe that should be handled in the other bug as above]. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1601997 Title: Ubuntu 16.10+ installer uses ext4 feature 'metadata_csum' which is incompatible with older (LTS) e2fsprogs To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/e2fsprogs/+bug/1601997/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1601997] Re: Ubuntu 16.10+ installer uses ext4 feature 'metadata_csum' which is incompatible with older (LTS) e2fsprogs
Initial comments from the email:- a) There is some confusion over "metadata_csum" with/without "64bit". -- Those who have 'reverted' are usually reverting BOTH flags [as I've done some places], not just metadata_csum. My understanding is 64bit is of no benefit except support >16TB fs and to strengthen metadata_csum's [if used, which help notice dodgy disks in theory.]. b) The business of including e2fsprogs-1.44.0 in 18.04 at tytso's request [NON-default extra feature support may benefit Samba users etc. later] is not addressed. c) Its' worth pointing-out explicitly e2fsprogs only enabled 64bit,metadata_csum 'by default' for 'everybody' within last few weeks, Debian change was as-you-rightly-quote. d) Considering the above, also think outside the ubuntu-box! What do canonical's customers/partners expect compatibility-wise with other non- ubuntu systems, virtualizers/ISCSI-hosts/etc (e2fsprogs 1.42 still very common!), let alone "backports to ubuntu LTS versions" only?. e) My understanding from TJ in IRC is he's started doing some tests on some datacentre cases, there are particular issues with things like ISCSI hosts, the host system needs to fsck guest-FS and break otherwise!. HOPEFULLY this will appear soon and can be added to the mail-discussion. I can try to join email/post directly to mail if appropriate/helpful. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1601997 Title: Ubuntu 16.10+ installer uses ext4 feature 'metadata_csum' which is incompatible with older (LTS) e2fsprogs To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/e2fsprogs/+bug/1601997/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1365874] Re: Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, 14.04 LTS, 16.04 LTS do not support ext4 metadata checksumming
FWIW, As was discussed, I checked into Grub2 and os-prober in older supported ubuntu (which may have similar incompatibility to e2fsprogs, thereby creating a multibooting issue with 18.04). After experimenting carefully with a 14.04+16.04+18.04 (GA kernels, no HWE specifically) BIOS-style triple boot, can confirm the grub ext4 support is all cross-compatible (14.04 can autodetect and boot 64bit,metadata_csum 18.04 from its' own grub2). However, e2fsprogs is DEFINITELY an issue as above, definitely worth sorting-out whatever-happens to the 18.04 default filesystem options, in my view. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1365874 Title: Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, 14.04 LTS, 16.04 LTS do not support ext4 metadata checksumming To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/e2fsprogs/+bug/1365874/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1601997] Re: Ubuntu 16.10+ installer uses ext4 feature 'metadata_csum' which is incompatible with older (LTS) e2fsprogs
Can we pay-attention, to this thread (now) being about considering the feature-flags 'used by default' in mke2fs.conf, in consideration to 18.04 -- [linked bug for e2fsprogs]. We know massive 'compatibility'/portability benefit of formatting the same as previous-LTS by default, as the required e2fsprogs was only introduced 16.10, and the needed kernel was only in 16.04 (and 14.04 -HWE-kernel-update.). NB: Looks like there is a similar issue with GRUB2 which affects dual-booters, grub2 2.02beta3 may be needed to support 64bit FS. If so, again Xenial isn't compatible to detect an 18.04 in multi-boot-menu. I'd like tytso to comment on the downsides of formatting without 64bit,metadata_csum, more specifically. From what I can (see) this only loses a little extra checksumming-integrity (against bad disks, which we've never needed before??), and the 64bit feature appears only to be needed to strengthen these checksums or support >16TB disks (bearing in mind auto_64bit_support can still be used). NB: Is this correct, -OR- is there likely going to be future annoyances with 'other' ext4 features-to-come which will ALSO expect 64bit formatting?. My suggestion is, this hasn't been sorted-out enough in the ubuntu- world, and 64bit,metadata_csum should be disabled-by-default for 18.04 and backporting grub/e2fsprogs/etc where relevant should happen as well [see other thread, possibly another may be created for grub2]. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1601997 Title: Ubuntu 16.10+ installer uses ext4 feature 'metadata_csum' which is incompatible with older (LTS) e2fsprogs To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/e2fsprogs/+bug/1601997/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1365874] Re: Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, 14.04 LTS, 16.04 LTS do not support ext4 metadata checksumming
Given your other comment (which I think may have been posted to the wrong thread):- [E2fsprogs 1.44.0 now depends on dpkg build-profiles, which means that getting it backported to 14.04 LTS would require adjusting debian/control and debian/rules a bit. For 14.04 LTS, I'd urge consideration of going to e2fsprogs 1.43.9. This will get you most of the latest bug fixes, including some that could cause massive file system corruption and data loss (relative to e2fsprogs 1.42.x) in the right (wrong) circumstances.] --are you saying that 1.39.9/1.44.0 ought to not only go to trusty-backports and xenial-backports, but also then into 'updates' to be 'pushed to all users' -- that needs some fiddly SRU process ? I note Debian haven't pushed such an update back to jessie/wheezy either. I (suspect) Canonical will require significant 'evidence'/'bug-reports' for backports to become 'updates' in this circumstance... HOPEFULLY 1.44.0 into bionic will be easier. Hope that helps, -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1365874 Title: Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, 14.04 LTS, 16.04 LTS do not support ext4 metadata checksumming To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/e2fsprogs/+bug/1365874/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1601997] Re: Ubuntu 16.10 installer sets metadata_csum option on ext4 partition which is incompatible with other LTS Ubuntu versions
Canonical please read Theodore Tso's Comment #4 above, and consider for
Ubuntu 18.04 LTS!
This "64bit,metadata_csum" creates compatibility-issues even with 16.04
LTS, and does not seem to provide a huge benefit [>16TB fs support,
slightly stronger metadata checksumming].
This creates all sorts of problems for compatibility/portability of
filesystems, e.g.:-
* dual-booting 18.04, even previous LTS version cannot fsck the filesystem.
* "ext4 portable disks" created by 18.04 similarly same problem.
* Also consider how wide is the 64bit,metadata_csum support anyway, users may
want disks to work with many distros/drivers? Canonical's
commercial-supporters may have views herein?. -- the linked bugreport also
mentions another issue with hwe-edge and LVM.
Also note, turning off the 64bit,metadata_csum when required is a total
PAIN, needing filesystem offline, fsck and tune2fs in careful
concert.
In my view, the 16.04 LTS mke2fs.conf [ ext4{} stanza with
"auto_64-bit_support = 1" and NO "64bit,metadata_csum" in "features" ]
should be seriously-considered for 18.04 "LTS" (even if 18.10 onwards follow
Debian).
As tytso says, this 'change' has been "Decision-by-Default" due to
importing a Debian upstream package, I would like Canonical to make an
'informed and considered decision' about this please!.
Hope that helps!
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1601997
Title:
Ubuntu 16.10 installer sets metadata_csum option on ext4 partition
which is incompatible with other LTS Ubuntu versions
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/e2fsprogs/+bug/1601997/+subscriptions
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1365874] Re: Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, 14.04 LTS, 16.04 LTS do not support ext4 metadata checksumming
Ubuntu 18.04 may well enable (under review) 64bit,metadata_csum by default, thereby creating ext4 filesystems that are not compatible with e2fsck on Ubuntu-16.04 LTS (or 14.04)? This creates all sorts of problems for compatibility/portability of filesystems, for e.g.:- * dual-booting 18.04 and older LTS versions * "ext4 portable disks" do not work. * (notice also Ken's hwe-edge/lvm issue above too). I strongly support that Xenial gets a backport of e2fsprogs-1.43 (as requested) so that this compatibility-annoyance is ameliorated, at least. Debian have already done this, created a "jessie-backports" e2fsprogs=1.43.3-1~bpo8+1 Hopefully tytso can advise us on the best version of e2fsprogs to backport (18.04 currently has 1.43.9-2). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1365874 Title: Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, 14.04 LTS, 16.04 LTS do not support ext4 metadata checksumming To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/e2fsprogs/+bug/1365874/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 57091] Re: proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_syncookies=1 should be seriously considered to permit SYN flood defense...
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 > Bog standard 16.04 has it turned on (from the above referenced 10 > -network-security.conf). > But, if you then enabled ufw, it gets disabled, due to the default > setting in /etc/ufw/sysctl.conf. > There seems to be serious debate as to whether or not enabling it is > correct. I haven't seen why not to enable use of adaptive syncookies, aiui this creates no _disadvantage_ if not being triggered... I CAN understand that for some scenarios the 'right thing to do' is Increase the tcp_max_syn_backlog as cookies are triggering too easily, even then it won't stop connections being accepted albeit with less tcp options possible, but then without syncookies the connections would be dropped as the syn queue fills... > What I know is that I just spent two hours trying to figure out why SANE > took forever to detect my network scanner, and this syslog entry clued > me in: > Oct 6 22:54:26 hiro kernel: [48562.817258] TCP: request_sock_TCP: > Possible SYN flooding on port 34029. Dropping request. Check SNMP > The dropped request was responsible for the delay. If I enable syn > cookies, I get: > Oct 6 22:57:28 hiro kernel: [48744.796029] TCP: request_sock_TCP: > Possible SYN flooding on port 42041. Sending cookies. Check SNMP > capture it, there's ONE SYN request and the kernel thinks it's a > "flood".. which makes no sense. Weird :). I can't say I'm familiar with uwf, but I wonder if it is somehow oversensitive in its' own ip(6)tables or they are fiddling with:- /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_max_syn_backlog Do raise bug in the ufw // ufw sysctl.conf Also email me separately the relevant bug numbers etc., be curious to see!! - --Simon -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Topal (http://freshmeat.net/projects/topal) iF4EAREIAAYFAlf3SqEACgkQA62i3HuJ2aHNCwEAnK4NvLNm/tKHzFNSEK+KRNMB 6hZOZ6tcnbecljP1+dAA/3C0bmEHFXEzeLF3xYNSco+py2TbD2bNPzXbG0NKsupb =Fh0+ -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/57091 Title: proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_syncookies=1 should be seriously considered to permit SYN flood defense... To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/procps/+bug/57091/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 57091] Re: proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_syncookies=1 should be seriously considered to permit SYN flood defense...
Upstream kernel have decided to enable syncookies by default (according to that debian bug, since Linux 2.6.37!). This makes sense, as the main downsides have already been resolved (especially window scaling even under syncookies-activation), and this feature only kicks-in if the SYN-queue is overloaded. We might now consider taking out this (now superfluous) tcp_syncookies entry from /etc/sysctl.d/10-network-security.conf ... I think, a similar situation has now arisen with respect to the "tcp_ecn" setting, where the (conservative) (enabled by default) fallback mechanism in the kernel, along with the rarity of ecn- intolerance, along with the wide ECN-adoption in practice in Apple ios / MAC OS X now, along with the importance of ECN for smooth responsive internet in the face of congestion, means that this tcp_ecn setting should similarly be seriously considered. This should be the subject of new bug report right-soon-now =). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/57091 Title: proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_syncookies=1 should be seriously considered to permit SYN flood defense... To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/procps/+bug/57091/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1101779] Re: autofs "lookup_mount: exports lookup" fails on IPv6-only hosts
There have been various upstream ipv6 related fixes in the debian/ubuntu changelogs,, imported from upstream and otherwise. Is this bug still present in debian stretch and ubuntu xenial with newer autofs packages ? I'd suggest testing ubuntu-xenial in particular as the next LTS release (underpinning mint 18 LTS) to come out? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Server Team, which is subscribed to autofs in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1101779 Title: autofs "lookup_mount: exports lookup" fails on IPv6-only hosts To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/linuxmint/+bug/1101779/+subscriptions -- Ubuntu-server-bugs mailing list Ubuntu-server-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server-bugs
[Bug 1101779] Re: autofs "lookup_mount: exports lookup" fails on IPv6-only hosts
There have been various upstream ipv6 related fixes in the debian/ubuntu changelogs,, imported from upstream and otherwise. Is this bug still present in debian stretch and ubuntu xenial with newer autofs packages ? I'd suggest testing ubuntu-xenial in particular as the next LTS release (underpinning mint 18 LTS) to come out? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1101779 Title: autofs "lookup_mount: exports lookup" fails on IPv6-only hosts To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/linuxmint/+bug/1101779/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 891433] [NEW] squid3 miss_access bug, fix not included in LTS
Public bug reported: This bug:- http://bugs.squid-cache.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3326 Is still present in the Precise12.04-LTS squid3, 3.1.15-1ubuntu2, which has become the main version of squid as of Precise12.04. This is a one-line-fix (though I had to merge it manually):- http://www.squid-cache.org/Versions/v3/3.1/changesets/squid-3.1-10373.patch It would be good to have the fix included in the Precise12.04 release, for those who rely on miss_access rules. ** Affects: squid3 (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/891433 Title: squid3 miss_access bug, fix not included in LTS To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/squid3/+bug/891433/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 842586] Re: sflphone FTBFS (unavail. b-d libedateserverui1.2-dev) and is NBS
The fundamental problem here, seems to be, that sflphone is built against gnome2 style 'libedataserverui1.2-dev' and this is not available with Gnome-3 (although some of the other libraries such as libedataserver1.2 ARE still there). I'm not 100% sure but I think the 'right thing to do' is make sflphone able to compile against libedataserverui3.0-dev but no doubt for some time it will also need to be able to compile against the gnome 2.0, libedataserverui1.2-dev too Just changing the dependencies, gets as far as an error about vbox not being a valid element in something to do with dialog boxes =). Clearly the compile-level-interface has changed such that some of the code needs rewriting to fix this, I think. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/842586 Title: sflphone FTBFS (unavail. b-d libedateserverui1.2-dev) and is NBS To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sflphone/+bug/842586/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 869127] Re: Please add sflphone package for Oneiric
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 842586 *** https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/842586 ** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 842586 sflphone FTBFS (unavail. b-d libedateserverui1.2-dev) and is NBS -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/869127 Title: Please add sflphone package for Oneiric To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sflphone/+bug/869127/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 842586] Re: sflphone FTBFS (unavail. b-d libedateserverui1.2-dev) and is NBS
There is a PPA of the 1.0.0-rc versions that may be acceptable to you ... https://launchpad.net/~savoirfairelinux/+archive/sflphone-nightly But this is a nightly-build, not a release-version as such... -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/842586 Title: sflphone FTBFS (unavail. b-d libedateserverui1.2-dev) and is NBS To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sflphone/+bug/842586/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 824080] Re: missing binary package linux-headers-2.6.35-30
As far as I can tell, this is now in the motions of being fixed via lucid-proposed. linux-headers-2.6.35-30 ver 2.6.35-30.58~lucid1 is there and 2.6.35-30.59 will be soon apparently. I guess when it appears, a good idea would be to test the version in lucid-proposed and report back on Bug 838043 if approprate. --Simon -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/824080 Title: missing binary package linux-headers-2.6.35-30 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-lts-backport-maverick/+bug/824080/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 829658] Re: linux-lts-backport-maverick: 2.6.35-30.58~lucid1 -proposed tracker
Please take note of related bug, which is collecting many duplicates etc. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/824080 With thanks, -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/829658 Title: linux-lts-backport-maverick: 2.6.35-30.58~lucid1 -proposed tracker To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/kernel-sru-workflow/+bug/829658/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 57091] Re: proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_syncookies=1 should be seriously considered to permit SYN flood defense...
On Fri, 9 Oct 2009, Olaf van der Spek wrote: Has this request been forwarded upstream (lkml)? Not that I am aware of. It would be good for this confusion/misinformation to get sorted out properly. Why is it that some wish to make sweeping statements and not understand the whole situation? What do you do in this circumstance? --Simon -- proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_syncookies=1 should be seriously considered to permit SYN flood defense... https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/57091 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 57091] Re: proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_syncookies=1 should be seriously considered to permit SYN flood defense...
Ah, nice. I kinda expected a link to the package version in which it got fixed. The silly thing is There is misinformation in the /etc/sysctl.conf now! It says:- # This disables TCP Window Scaling (http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/2/5/167) First of all that is incorrect as a blanket statement. A connection 'saved by syncookies' used to not allow window scaling. But, it always worked fine solong as there was not a synflood going on! Secondly, its' completely wrong now, because newer kernel SynCookies, will ALWAYS allow window scaling, regardless of syncookies having 'kicked in' or not! That could do with just being removed. --Simon -- proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_syncookies=1 should be seriously considered to permit SYN flood defense... https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/57091 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 203023] Re: PHP Startup: Unable to load dynamic library '/usr/lib/php5/20060613/imagick.so' - libWand.so.9
Looks like the latest updates to the php5 packages broke it again. The symlink solution doesn't work and I have the latest version of the package installed. What release / architechure are you using? (cat /etc/lsb-release);(uname -a) What version of php5-imagick has just got installed? (dpkg -l php5-imagick) What error do you now get exactly? I have been quite successful in installing php5-imagick on ubuntu Jaunty9.04 i386, without trouble (just tried that)... --Simon -- PHP Startup: Unable to load dynamic library '/usr/lib/php5/20060613/imagick.so' - libWand.so.9 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/203023 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Server Team, which is a bug assignee. -- Ubuntu-server-bugs mailing list Ubuntu-server-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server-bugs
Re: [Bug 203023] Re: PHP Startup: Unable to load dynamic library '/usr/lib/php5/20060613/imagick.so' - libWand.so.9
Thanks for your quick response, here are the 3 pieces of information you requested. DISTRIB_DESCRIPTION=Ubuntu 8.04.2 [...]i686 GNU/Linux ||/ Naam Versie Omschrijving +++-==-==- ii php5-imagick 2.0.1-1ImageMagick module for php5 PHP Warning: PHP Startup: Unable to load dynamic library '/usr/lib/php5/2006061 3+lfs/imagick.so' - libWand.so.9: cannot open shared object file: No such file o It would seem you have the 'hardy' version of the php5-imagick package, 2.0.1-1 which has the bug. (It was linked with libWand.so.9 version). The 'hardy-updates' version of php5-imagick (** 2.0.1-1ubuntu0.1 **) depends upon 'libmagick10' and does not appear to have this problem. I.e. it would appear you have the old un-fixed version of the package!! See:- http://packages.ubuntu.com/php5-imagick If you look in your /etc/apt/sources.list file you may be missing hardy-updates... My Hardy8.04 machine has this in /etc/apt/sources/list:- deb http://gb.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ hardy main universe deb-src http://gb.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ hardy main universe deb http://gb.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ hardy-updates main universe deb-src http://gb.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ hardy-updates main universe deb http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu hardy-security main universe deb-src http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu hardy-security main universe Good luck! --Simon -- PHP Startup: Unable to load dynamic library '/usr/lib/php5/20060613/imagick.so' - libWand.so.9 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/203023 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Server Team, which is a bug assignee. -- Ubuntu-server-bugs mailing list Ubuntu-server-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server-bugs
Re: [Bug 203023] Re: PHP Startup: Unable to load dynamic library '/usr/lib/php5/20060613/imagick.so' - libWand.so.9
Thanks for your quick response, here are the 3 pieces of information you requested. DISTRIB_DESCRIPTION=Ubuntu 8.04.2 [...]i686 GNU/Linux ||/ Naam Versie Omschrijving +++-==-==- ii php5-imagick 2.0.1-1ImageMagick module for php5 PHP Warning: PHP Startup: Unable to load dynamic library '/usr/lib/php5/2006061 3+lfs/imagick.so' - libWand.so.9: cannot open shared object file: No such file o It would seem you have the 'hardy' version of the php5-imagick package, 2.0.1-1 which has the bug. (It was linked with libWand.so.9 version). The 'hardy-updates' version of php5-imagick (** 2.0.1-1ubuntu0.1 **) depends upon 'libmagick10' and does not appear to have this problem. I.e. it would appear you have the old un-fixed version of the package!! See:- http://packages.ubuntu.com/php5-imagick If you look in your /etc/apt/sources.list file you may be missing hardy-updates... My Hardy8.04 machine has this in /etc/apt/sources/list:- deb http://gb.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ hardy main universe deb-src http://gb.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ hardy main universe deb http://gb.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ hardy-updates main universe deb-src http://gb.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ hardy-updates main universe deb http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu hardy-security main universe deb-src http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu hardy-security main universe Good luck! --Simon -- PHP Startup: Unable to load dynamic library '/usr/lib/php5/20060613/imagick.so' - libWand.so.9 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/203023 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 203023] Re: PHP Startup: Unable to load dynamic library '/usr/lib/php5/20060613/imagick.so' - libWand.so.9
Looks like the latest updates to the php5 packages broke it again. The symlink solution doesn't work and I have the latest version of the package installed. What release / architechure are you using? (cat /etc/lsb-release);(uname -a) What version of php5-imagick has just got installed? (dpkg -l php5-imagick) What error do you now get exactly? I have been quite successful in installing php5-imagick on ubuntu Jaunty9.04 i386, without trouble (just tried that)... --Simon -- PHP Startup: Unable to load dynamic library '/usr/lib/php5/20060613/imagick.so' - libWand.so.9 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/203023 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 230544] Re: Computer lockup and screen full of garbage [i82810E DC-133]
I'm getting a similar error but different problem ;-). All worked fine on Ubuntu 8.04 LTS (actually I think I got warnings in the dmesg, but it all still *worked*). This machine has:- 00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation 82815 Chipset Graphics Controller (CGC) (rev 04) Under Ubuntu 8.10 -- even with a 'new' default xorg.conf -- all works fine on a single X-server... But as soon as I start a second X-server *using gdm / 'switch user'* it won't start, and I get similar errors in dmesg:- [41900.203101] mtrr: base(0xf800) is not aligned on a size(0x300) boundary [41933.640735] mtrr: no MTRR for f800,300 found [41949.696017] [drm:drm_release] *ERROR* reclaim_buffers_locked() deadlock. Please rework this [41949.696027] driver to use reclaim_buffers_idlelocked() instead. [41949.696030] I will go on reclaiming the buffers anyway. [41952.700010] [drm:i810_wait_ring] *ERROR* space: 65520 wanted 65528 [41952.700018] [drm:i810_wait_ring] *ERROR* lockup [41955.756017] [drm:drm_release] *ERROR* reclaim_buffers_locked() deadlock. Please rework this [41955.756026] driver to use reclaim_buffers_idlelocked() instead. [41955.756029] I will go on reclaiming the buffers anyway. The funny thing is, if I switch away from X server and start one manually, that works (but with no DRI)... I wonder what's going on!!! -- Computer lockup and screen full of garbage [i82810E DC-133] https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/230544 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 57091] Re: proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_syncookies=1 should be seriously considered to permit SYN flood defense...
On Thu, 23 Oct 2008, KimOlsen wrote: ...option causes the system to violate the TCP standard... I do not think this is the case. If you check RFC4732 they list this as a possible way to help against DoS attacks. I also believe that window scaling is not affected, but large windows are. But accepting legit traffic without large windows is better than dropping the connections. Note, that, seemingly, as of Linux 2.6.26, tcp connections with large windows can now be accepted under syn-flood too! So, even that, no longer matters, seemingly... So if the implementation is an adaptive one that only use SYN cookies when under huge load, then I am all for this. Yes, it is. Linux produces messages on the kernel log, to say sending cookies when this happens. I.e. SYN-cookies do NOT come into play unless there is a high load of incoming connections. I can understand that some systems receiving a legitimately high number of connections, it may be necessary to increase the net.ipv4.tcp_max_syn_backlog (or whatever it is, exactly) to avoid the use of cookies... but that *still* does not create any reason not to have set tcp_syncookies=1 !! At least in the server edition. I don't see why the install CD type matters, myself... Any install can result in some use of TCP listening sockets somewhere! Also... that then means extra work to setup different sysctl settings based upon install-disk... But thats' only my thoughts... It would be good to get this sorted-out properly... But I don't know what other information is needed. I guess the problem is not information.. in this world of information-overload ;-). If Ubuntu networking team, don't want to change the setting, they don't want to change the setting... puzzling... --Simon -- proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_syncookies=1 should be seriously considered to permit SYN flood defense... https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/57091 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 57091] Re: proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_syncookies=1 should be seriously considered to permit SYN flood defense...
On Fri, 12 Sep 2008, Kees Cook wrote: Enabling syncookies disables TCP window scaling[1], I think this is incorrect as-stated But this should be confirmed/proved/disproved. As far as I have found out elsewhere, the syn-cookies support in Linux is adaptive, and does NOT come into play unless there is an overflow of SYN_RECVD ... I.e. tcp window scaling DOES work with syncookies=1 -- just not when there is a real syn-flood-problem ... but... if syncookies was not enabled, such a connection would likely not succeed at all! -- what is better? ;-). (but --see below -- situation is now different with latest kernel!) and in most situations, existing SYN-flood protections in the kernel already address most sorts of those attacks. What are these 'existing SYN-flood protections' and how do they work? Inceasing the backlog is simply increasing a finite limit -- randomly dropping SYN_RECVD entries also makes syn-flooding slightly less effective relateve to forged-syn-traffic -- but -- it still should not actually take much traffic to overload the finite limits on SYN_RECVD thereby making new legitimate connections unlikely to succeed. The crptographic cookie approach avoids the need for the syn packet backlog... and stops the repetition of syn+ack packehs in those cases. In some situations (perhaps like what alecm3 was experiencing) there are situations it might be needed, I suspect that... with a busy server with many clients connecting a lot and connecting from slow links, it may be necessary to raise net.ipv4.tcp_max_syn_backlog because of legitimate rate/number of such not-yet-completed incoming-connections. Its' worth reading this article:- http://lwn.net/Articles/277146/ Seemingly 2.6.26 now supports syncookies on ipv6 too, and now supports connections with window-scaling even if connection was saved by syncookies. Rather than having arguments over the value of the setting etc... -- How do we get this properly investigated and sorted out? --Simon -- proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_syncookies=1 should be seriously considered to permit SYN flood defense... https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/57091 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
