Re: I have not been able to install F37 on a computer that has RAID1

[dwoody...@rdwoodyard.com]

On Mon, 01 May 2023 19:46:44 -0500
david.woody...@rdwoodyard.com wrote:

> I did respond to your last email, this is additional...
> 
> I don't normally top post, but in this situation I thought it
> appropriate:
> 
> 
> 
> I found the following:
> 
> https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/fedora-live-install-to-hard-drive-duplicate-uuid-issue/81136
> 
> 
> 
> Which is exactly what I am seeing.
> 
> reboot as required.
> 
> 
> 
> I think what I should do is unplug the sda and sdb drives from the
> computer (/home only).
> 
> sdc and sdd are 120G ssd's and only have the OS.
> 
> clear the partitions on sdc and sdd and install
> 
> 
> 
> plugin the sda/sdb drives back in for /home and add to /etc/fstab
> 
> That should take care of the UUID problems.
> 
I did as above except for clearing the partitions on sdd2 sdc2 which is the 
raid1 for the OS and everything worked correctly.
No UUID error, does disconnecting the /home drives sda sdb make a difference?
In my situation, it helped that I had separate raid1's for OS and /home.

This fixed my problem but since others might have raid / and /home on the same 
HDD I do not know if I should mark this as SOLVED?

Any thoughts on this?

The raid1 (sdd2/sdc2) was created during the install (anaconda) notice both 
drives have the same UUID.

Listing of UUID's:
/dev/sdd2: UUID="9a61854c-c850-947e-a646-6447c94fbdd3" 
UUID_SUB="4139a198-5809-ac9b-4d4f-fea766bf4975" LABEL="star1.home.com:root" 
TYPE="linux_raid_member" PARTUUID="c422c703-0776-4477-9a12-45fb3d8635d4"
/dev/sdc2: UUID="9a61854c-c850-947e-a646-6447c94fbdd3" 
UUID_SUB="b7e4f7de-9aa9-f33b-a7ba-81fabc16bf90" LABEL="star1.home.com:root" 
TYPE="linux_raid_member" PARTUUID="ef0add0a-9fa7-48c0-aacd-b540189554a9"

/dev/sdb2: UUID="a92ca2fd-998f-d542-feb8-59fa8bd7ab33" 
UUID_SUB="dc6884eb-956e-aa80-8b52-5656365517d1" LABEL="star11.home.com:home" 
TYPE="linux_raid_member" PARTUUID="0009d086-02"
/dev/sda2: UUID="a92ca2fd-998f-d542-feb8-59fa8bd7ab33" 
UUID_SUB="748fd654-f6a6-b72e-dab0-75dfb8b9f1af" LABEL="star11.home.com:home" 
TYPE="linux_raid_member" PARTUUID="0009d086-02"

[cs@star1 data2]$ lsblk
NAME  MAJ:MIN RM   SIZE RO TYPE  MOUNTPOINTS
sda 8:01 931.5G  0 disk  
└─sda2  8:21 916.9G  0 part  
  └─md126   9:126  0 916.7G  0 raid1 /home
sdb 8:16   1 931.5G  0 disk  
├─sdb1  8:17   1  14.7G  0 part  
└─sdb2  8:18   1 916.9G  0 part  
  └─md126   9:126  0 916.7G  0 raid1 /home
sdc 8:32   0 111.8G  0 disk  
├─sdc1  8:33   0 1M  0 part  
└─sdc2  8:34   0 111.8G  0 part  
  └─md127   9:127  0 111.7G  0 raid1 /
sdd 8:48   0 111.8G  0 disk  
├─sdd1  8:49   0 1M  0 part  
└─sdd2  8:50   0 111.8G  0 part  
  └─md127   9:127  0 111.7G  0 raid1 /

> 
> 
> Thanks for your help,
> 
> 
> 
> David
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  On Mon, 01 May 2023 16:48:25 -0500 david woodyard
>  wrote ---
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  On Mon, 01 May 2023 16:12:20 -0500 Peter Boy
>  wrote ---
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > Am 01.05.2023 um 22:22 schrieb David Woodyard
> > : 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Mon, May 1, 2023 at 11:33 AM David Woodyard
> >  wrote: the server is what I need to
> > install. 
> > 
> > David 
> > 
> > On Mon, May 1, 2023 at 11:28 AM Peter Boy
> >  wrote: 
> > 
> > 
> > > Am 01.05.2023 um 18:12 schrieb David Woodyard
> > > : 
> > > 
> > > I have searched the web for a solution and have found nothing on
> > > this topic. The error I get is sda1 and sdb1 have the same UUID.
> > > I would rather not remove a drive from raid and unplug it to do
> > > the install. 
> > > 
> > > I must be missing something. 
> > 
> > It’s a well proven procedure. What do you want to install?
> > Workstation, Server, one of the Spins? 
> > 
> > Gmail has deleted your second reply, so I am replying to this one. 
>  
> I suppose you mean my last reply. I add it at the bottom. 
>  
> > 
> > I, perhaps, was not as clear as I should have been on my first
> > email. I have a computer that has a raid1 and it has been working
> > for several years. I want to install Fedora-Server 37. When I run
> > the install (anaconda) it gives an error about duplicate UUID's and
> > will not do the install. 
> > 
> > That tells me that I can not install on a computer that ALREADY has
> > raid1. I was not expecting that error. 
> > 
> > Is it correct that anaconda can NOT install to a hard drive that
> > ALREADY has a RAID1? Is there a workaround other than removing one
> > drive from the raid and unplugging it from the computer? 
>  
> No, that’s not correct. I think, no system can use 2 disk which have
> the same UUID at the same time (besides maybe one of the Windows BIOS
> fake controller). Duplicate UUID is a contradictio in adiecto and
> should be fixed. Anaconda can install on existing raid anyway. And
> there are several ways to fix the issue with the UUID. 

Re: Systemd Unit Fails at Boot, but Succeeds when Started from the Console

[Samuel Sieb]

On 4/30/23 14:25, Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:

Here is an extract from the system log (a fuller extract is attached):
Mar 18 07:57:56 OaklandWeather.localdomain systemd[1]: Started 
noip-duc.service - No-IP Dynamic Update Client.
Mar 18 07:57:58 OaklandWeather.localdomain systemd[1]: noip-duc.service: 
Main process exited, code=exited, status=2/INVALIDARGUMENT


I would assume it's not finding the interface that it wants to check for 
the IP address.  You could try adding "RestartSec=20" to the service 
file.  That way it will give more time before failing.  If that doesn't 
work, then it's more likely some sort of permissions issue.

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[389-users] Re: 389 Ldap Cleanallruv Replica Crash

[Mark Reynolds]

It could be related to:


https://github.com/389ds/389-ds-base/issues/5743


Can you please try and get a stack trace of the crash/core?


https://www.port389.org/docs/389ds/FAQ/faq.html#sts=Debugging%C2%A0Crashes


Thanks,
Mark


On 5/2/23 3:00 PM, Juan Quintanilla wrote:

Hi,

I recently installed 389-ds-base-libs-2.2.6-2.el8.x86_64 and 
389-ds-base-2.2.6-2.el8.x86_64 on an ALma Linux 8 Server, but I'm 
encountering an issue with removing offline replicas from our existing 
389 Ldap.


When the command below is executed on one of the suppliers:

dsconf INSTANCE_NAME repl-tasks cleanallruv --suffix 
"ou=sample,dc=test,dc=dom" --replica-id 20 --force-cleaning


The entry is removed from the ldap supplier, and when the change is 
sent to the secondary supplier it is also removed with no problem.  
The issue is when the change is sent to the consumer, the slapd 
process will instantly crash.  When the consumer instance is brought 
back up the entry that needed to be removed is gone.


Has anyone encountered a similar issue with the consumers crashing 
during a cleanallruv request or cleanruv?


I also tried running a cleanruv task on each server, suppliers have no 
issue. When the command is run on the readonly consumers the slapd 
process crashes.


ldapmodify -x -D "cn=manager" -W 

[389-users] 389 Ldap Cleanallruv Replica Crash

[Juan Quintanilla]

Hi,

I recently installed 389-ds-base-libs-2.2.6-2.el8.x86_64 and 
389-ds-base-2.2.6-2.el8.x86_64 on an ALma Linux 8 Server, but I'm encountering 
an issue with removing offline replicas from our existing 389 Ldap.

When the command below is executed on one of the suppliers:

dsconf INSTANCE_NAME repl-tasks cleanallruv --suffix "ou=sample,dc=test,dc=dom" 
--replica-id 20 --force-cleaning

The entry is removed from the ldap supplier, and when the change is sent to the 
secondary supplier it is also removed with no problem.  The issue is when the 
change is sent to the consumer, the slapd process will instantly crash.  When 
the consumer instance is brought back up the entry that needed to be removed is 
gone.

Has anyone encountered a similar issue with the consumers crashing during a 
cleanallruv request or cleanruv?

I also tried running a cleanruv task on each server, suppliers have no issue. 
When the command is run on the readonly consumers the slapd process crashes.

ldapmodify -x -D "cn=manager" -W <___
389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: More space needed on the / filesystem to upgrade from F37 to F38

[Jeffrey Walton]

On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 4:13 AM Roberto Ragusa  wrote:
> [...]
> My personal system was installed with FC3 in 2005 and then continuously
> upgraded up to currently FC36.
> (it has even got metamorphosis from i686 to x86_64, something that was 
> considered
> impossible to do)

That's impressive.

Jeff
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: More space needed on the / filesystem to upgrade from F37 to F38

[Samuel Sieb]

On 5/2/23 07:40, Tim via users wrote:

On Tue, 2023-05-02 at 10:13 +0200, Roberto Ragusa wrote:

I will never understand why people are so inclined to restart from scratch
with a new install every time.


Bad experience doing it in the past, and the huge number of times I've
read about the problems people have needed help to resolve on this
list.


Where have you seen these huge number of times?  I've only seen a few 
instances on this list and that's a self-selected sample.  It's quite 
rare that someone is going to post about a successful update.


I have upgraded systems hundreds of times with only a very few (single 
digit) failures that required intervention.  And that was generally 
because of hardware issues like the laptop wasn't actually plugged in 
and the battery died.

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Post F38 upgrade/fresh install: printing text files via paps (a Postscript converter) prints raw postscript

[stan via users]

On Tue, 2 May 2023 11:52:47 -0400
Todd Zullinger  wrote:

> stan via users wrote:
> > But, why is this a bug?  Stable versions are often at
> > lower release versions for rpms than newer versions.  
> 
> The bug is that 0.8.0 includes a fix which 0.7.9 lacks.
> That context was only in the github link which Max posted.
> Until I read that, I had the same reaction. :)

Caught!  I didn't visit the link.  :-)
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: I have not been able to install F37 on a computer that has RAID1

[Roger Heflin]

On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 10:46 AM Doug Herr  wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 2, 2023, at 8:14 AM, Roger Heflin wrote:
> > Hardware or software raid typically makes and exact copy of what they
> > are mirroring.
>
> I was just preparing a reply to this. I had been confused since I do run 
> Linux MD raid 1 and I was pretty sure I had matching UUID. Here are two 
> examples that show older and newer raid version/type:
>
> (note that they use matching UUID for the members, but use a unique UUID for 
> the raid, and that there is also a unique PARTUUID for each)
>
> 8:39-doug@wombat-~>blkid | grep 7:
> /dev/sdb7: UUID="a1efda72-102e-139f-6435-186fb839f57c" 
> TYPE="linux_raid_member" PARTUUID="28f4447c-07"
> /dev/md7: UUID="8688b29b-c244-4dc6-88bc-02f282396dc3" BLOCK_SIZE="4096" 
> TYPE="ext4"
> /dev/sda7: UUID="a1efda72-102e-139f-6435-186fb839f57c" 
> TYPE="linux_raid_member" PARTUUID="87e58b90-07"
>
> 8:39-doug@wombat-~>blkid | grep 1:
> /dev/sdb1: UUID="deb9b913-0a73-90d8-6b37-12e5156fce03" 
> UUID_SUB="50b1ecf9-a7bd-6ba5-131e-4bbde91735c8" 
> LABEL="wombat.wombatz.com:boot" TYPE="linux_raid_member" 
> PARTUUID="28f4447c-01"
> /dev/sda1: UUID="deb9b913-0a73-90d8-6b37-12e5156fce03" 
> UUID_SUB="8efb2a67-f08a-4ba9-186f-11f7afec25c7" 
> LABEL="wombat.wombatz.com:boot" TYPE="linux_raid_member" 
> PARTUUID="87e58b90-01"
> /dev/md1: UUID="72f36fca-b84e-45f4-8621-d85b14a32ff3" BLOCK_SIZE="4096" 
> TYPE="ext4"
> ___

If your only duplicates are the above member UUID's then anaconda must
have a bug in dealing with pre-existing md-raid configs and not
ignoring the raid_members that will be duplicate.

Given 38 is out you may simply want to try to see if 38 works or not.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Post F38 upgrade/fresh install: printing text files via paps (a Postscript converter) prints raw postscript

[Max Pyziur]

On Tue, 2 May 2023, stan via users wrote:


On Tue, 2 May 2023 11:20:44 -0400 (EDT)
Max Pyziur  wrote:

Working directly with the paps developer on github
(https://github.com/dov/paps/discussions/63)

We've come across a bug.

Current F37 version is:
paps-0.7.1-5.fc37

Current F38 version is:
paps-0.7.9-1.fc38

Latest stable version is
paps-0.8.x

This needs to be reported Fedora maintainers and a new paps release
needs to be made available.


That would be through the bugzilla:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/
You will need to set up an account, and then follow the fedora links
after you select 'New' or 'File a Bug'.  I checked, and there isn't
already a bug opened for this.


Thank you. Just stubled through a bugzilla report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2192645


But, why is this a bug?  Stable versions are often at lower release


I'm just a motorhead (dutiful Fedora user).


versions for rpms than newer versions.  And when I look in koji, I see
that newer versions are already built for F38 and F39 (rawhide).  They
were built yesterday, so should be showing up in updates testing today,
and in stable in a few days. You could go to koji,
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2161630
and grab the latest rpm and install it locally using
dnf -C install [package name]
to see if it fixes your issue.


Great, looking forward to updating to the new version.

Max
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Post F38 upgrade/fresh install: printing text files via paps (a Postscript converter) prints raw postscript

[Todd Zullinger]

stan via users wrote:
> But, why is this a bug?  Stable versions are often at
> lower release versions for rpms than newer versions.

The bug is that 0.8.0 includes a fix which 0.7.9 lacks.
That context was only in the github link which Max posted.
Until I read that, I had the same reaction. :)

-- 
Todd


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Post F38 upgrade/fresh install: printing text files via paps (a Postscript converter) prints raw postscript

[stan via users]

On Tue, 2 May 2023 11:20:44 -0400 (EDT)
Max Pyziur  wrote:
> Working directly with the paps developer on github 
> (https://github.com/dov/paps/discussions/63)
> 
> We've come across a bug.
> 
> Current F37 version is:
> paps-0.7.1-5.fc37
> 
> Current F38 version is:
> paps-0.7.9-1.fc38
> 
> Latest stable version is
> paps-0.8.x
> 
> This needs to be reported Fedora maintainers and a new paps release
> needs to be made available.

That would be through the bugzilla:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/
You will need to set up an account, and then follow the fedora links
after you select 'New' or 'File a Bug'.  I checked, and there isn't
already a bug opened for this.

But, why is this a bug?  Stable versions are often at lower release
versions for rpms than newer versions.  And when I look in koji, I see
that newer versions are already built for F38 and F39 (rawhide).  They
were built yesterday, so should be showing up in updates testing today,
and in stable in a few days. You could go to koji,
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2161630
and grab the latest rpm and install it locally using
dnf -C install [package name]
to see if it fixes your issue.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: I have not been able to install F37 on a computer that has RAID1

[Doug Herr]

On Tue, May 2, 2023, at 8:14 AM, Roger Heflin wrote:
> Hardware or software raid typically makes and exact copy of what they
> are mirroring.

I was just preparing a reply to this. I had been confused since I do run Linux 
MD raid 1 and I was pretty sure I had matching UUID. Here are two examples that 
show older and newer raid version/type:

(note that they use matching UUID for the members, but use a unique UUID for 
the raid, and that there is also a unique PARTUUID for each)

8:39-doug@wombat-~>blkid | grep 7:
/dev/sdb7: UUID="a1efda72-102e-139f-6435-186fb839f57c" TYPE="linux_raid_member" 
PARTUUID="28f4447c-07"
/dev/md7: UUID="8688b29b-c244-4dc6-88bc-02f282396dc3" BLOCK_SIZE="4096" 
TYPE="ext4"
/dev/sda7: UUID="a1efda72-102e-139f-6435-186fb839f57c" TYPE="linux_raid_member" 
PARTUUID="87e58b90-07"

8:39-doug@wombat-~>blkid | grep 1:
/dev/sdb1: UUID="deb9b913-0a73-90d8-6b37-12e5156fce03" 
UUID_SUB="50b1ecf9-a7bd-6ba5-131e-4bbde91735c8" LABEL="wombat.wombatz.com:boot" 
TYPE="linux_raid_member" PARTUUID="28f4447c-01"
/dev/sda1: UUID="deb9b913-0a73-90d8-6b37-12e5156fce03" 
UUID_SUB="8efb2a67-f08a-4ba9-186f-11f7afec25c7" LABEL="wombat.wombatz.com:boot" 
TYPE="linux_raid_member" PARTUUID="87e58b90-01"
/dev/md1: UUID="72f36fca-b84e-45f4-8621-d85b14a32ff3" BLOCK_SIZE="4096" 
TYPE="ext4"
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Post F38 upgrade/fresh install: printing text files via paps (a Postscript converter) prints raw postscript

[Todd Zullinger]

Max Pyziur wrote:
> Working directly with the paps developer on github
> (https://github.com/dov/paps/discussions/63)
> 
> We've come across a bug.
> 
> Current F37 version is:
> paps-0.7.1-5.fc37
> 
> Current F38 version is:
> paps-0.7.9-1.fc38
> 
> Latest stable version is
> paps-0.8.x
> 
> This needs to be reported Fedora maintainers and a new paps release needs to
> be made available.
> 
> I'm like a rooster tap-dancing in golashes here. How does this get reported
> to Fedora maintainers?

This would be reported at https://bugzilla.redhat.com.

There is (rather copious) documentation for the process at:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/howto-file-a-bug/

It looks like there aren't a lot of changes between the
0.7.9 and 0.8.0 release.  The maintainer has already updated
the package in rawhide (what will be Fedora 39).

If the changes don't cause any breaking changes, then
updating to 0.8.0 in stable Fedora release would be
reasonable.

-- 
Todd


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Post F38 upgrade/fresh install: printing text files via paps (a Postscript converter) prints raw postscript

[Max Pyziur]

Greetings,

Working directly with the paps developer on github 
(https://github.com/dov/paps/discussions/63)


We've come across a bug.

Current F37 version is:
paps-0.7.1-5.fc37

Current F38 version is:
paps-0.7.9-1.fc38

Latest stable version is
paps-0.8.x

This needs to be reported Fedora maintainers and a new paps release needs 
to be made available.


I'm like a rooster tap-dancing in golashes here. How does this get 
reported to Fedora maintainers?


Max
p...@brama.com






On Mon, 1 May 2023, Max Pyziur wrote:



Greetings,

My F38 upgrade on my desktop and my fresh install on my laptop (because of an 
upgrade crash) are taking place in less than stellar fashion. But given that 
things have been going very well in this regard since F27 (circa late 2017) 
something like this shouldn't be unexpected.


Trying to focus on one problem at a time, I am now dealing with printing text 
files.


For the last ten or so years, I've relied on enscript and then paps. I think 
that I switched to paps because enscript at the time didn't support utf-8.


paps has worked as designed for me until the upgrade/fresh install. My sole 
availabe printer is an HP P3015. On my desktop, I use the HP Postscript 
driver; on my laptop I use the HP LaserJet p3010 Series hpijs pcl3, 3.22.10 
driver for the printer.


When printing from a web browser (firefox of brave), libreoffice, evince, 
AcroRead, or gedit, the results are correct.


But now with the flip to F38, and issuing a paps command like this (which 
I've run for a decade):
paps --columns=3 --landscape --paper=letter --font="Monospace 6" 
/path/to/some/textfile | lpr -P lp3


the printer prints raw postscript.

(lp3 is the name that I use for the HP printer)

I suspect that I am part of a small community of paps users. But I would very 
much like to continue either using paps or something similar.


Could it be pango (required by paps)? some other possible dependency? Are 
there alternatives? Is there some nuance in configuring the printer?


I'd appreciate any advice here.

Much thanks,

Max
p...@brama.com


___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: More fun with SSL certificates

[Jeffrey Walton]

On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 9:44 AM Chris Adams  wrote:
>
> Once upon a time, Jeffrey Walton  said:
> > On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 6:22 AM Patrick O'Callaghan
> >  wrote:
> > > # openssl x509 -in cert.pem -noout -text
> > > Certificate:
> > > Data:
> > > Version: 3 (0x2)
> > > Serial Number:
> > > 04:ff:0e:50:c1:ee:21:26:7d:96:d1:97:5e:45:5a:d3:74:09
> > > Signature Algorithm: sha256WithRSAEncryption
> > > Issuer: C = US, O = Let's Encrypt, CN = R3
> > > Validity
> > > Not Before: May  1 21:20:11 2023 GMT
> > > Not After : Jul 30 21:20:10 2023 GMT
> > > Subject: CN = bree.org.uk
> > > Subject Public Key Info:
> > > Public Key Algorithm: id-ecPublicKey
> > > Public-Key: (256 bit)
> > > pub:
> > > 04:68:eb:44:a1:68:a8:f9:a0:54:ee:6e:ec:15:02:
> > > 5c:e8:a7:39:d0:32:11:9d:d4:71:52:85:64:49:74:
> > > ca:cf:f3:ed:b5:c3:3c:45:cb:62:0d:4a:9b:cb:ae:
> > > 27:51:aa:f8:22:65:dc:6d:8f:e7:5c:39:bd:28:a4:
> > > 5e:d8:10:18:0b
> > > ASN1 OID: prime256v1
> > > NIST CURVE: P-256
> > > ...
> >
> > CN = R3 does not match Apache's ServerName.
>
> You are looking at the Issuer field (i.e. the cert that was used to sign
> this cert).  And also, the Subject CN is not referenced by browsers
> anymore, only the subjectAltName DNS: entries (which were not shown).

Yeah, that one got away from me. The GMail editor sometimes sends when
I am trying to edit text.

Jeff
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: I have not been able to install F37 on a computer that has RAID1

[Roger Heflin]

Hardware or software raid typically makes and exact copy of what they
are mirroring.

Hardware raid typically mirrors the entire disk (all UUIDS on the disk
will be duplicated on the 2nd device, but in real hw raid the raid
controller hides the underlying devices), software raid can do the
entire disk or simply do one or more partitions, but exactly clones
what is in the mirrored partition, there will be design be duplicate
UUIDs for any FSes and/or PV/VG/LVM's.

It sounds like MD-RAID is creating the correct raid1 MD device(with
duplicate UUID for the fs as would be expected), but anaconda is not
correctly ignoring the underlying components in use and being managed
by MD-RAID.

On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 9:45 AM Tim via users
 wrote:
>
> Tim:
> >> Briefly looking at RAID information, there are things that should be
> >> unique, and there are some things that can be duplicated (not so sure
> >> that they should be, though).  Drive IDs would need to be unique for
> >> anything that uses IDs to differentiate one drive from other.  There's
> >> partition and volume IDs that are used for different purposes.
>
> Peter Boy:
> > I agree. But it’s hard not to use  UIEDs and to ignore misconfigured
> > UUIDs. Many Fedora tools use UUID by default, e.g. Cockpit and - if I
> > remember correctly - dbus. Therefore, cloning a disc often ends up in
> > more work than cloning saves.
>
> Since my experience with RAID is minimal (using a motherboard with
> built-in hardware RAID that could not be shut-off on the drive ports I
> had to use), I assume that if a mirror drive dies, you swap it, and let
> the RAID do its own magic to incorporate the replacement drive into the
> system, it handles filling up the new drive with partitions and data
> from the other drive without cloning IDs.
>
> --
>
> uname -rsvp
> Linux 3.10.0-1160.88.1.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Mar 7 15:41:52 UTC 2023 x86_64
>
> Boilerplate:  All unexpected mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted.
> I will only get to see the messages that are posted to the mailing list.
>
> ___
> users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: 
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it: 
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: I have not been able to install F37 on a computer that has RAID1

[Peter Boy]

> Am 02.05.2023 um 16:45 schrieb Tim via users :
> 
> Tim:
>>> Briefly looking at RAID information, there are things that should be
>>> unique, and there are some things that can be duplicated (not so sure
>>> that they should be, though).  Drive IDs would need to be unique for
>>> anything that uses IDs to differentiate one drive from other.  There's
>>> partition and volume IDs that are used for different purposes.
> 
> Peter Boy:
>> I agree. But it’s hard not to use  UIEDs and to ignore misconfigured
>> UUIDs. Many Fedora tools use UUID by default, e.g. Cockpit and - if I
>> remember correctly - dbus. Therefore, cloning a disc often ends up in
>> more work than cloning saves. 
> 
> Since my experience with RAID is minimal (using a motherboard with
> built-in hardware RAID that could not be shut-off on the drive ports I
> had to use), I assume that if a mirror drive dies, you swap it, and let
> the RAID do its own magic to incorporate the replacement drive into the
> system, it handles filling up the new drive with partitions and data
> from the other drive without cloning IDs.

Software Raid write various meta data on the drive. Therefor - as I understand 
the docs - you MUST NOT clone the drive. I use SW Raid on my private servers 
only, and luckily I had not so much drive failures so far. But SW Raid restored 
the drive on its own when I tested it a while ago. However, according to my 
memory, I had created a (empty) partition table. I don't remember if that was 
necessary or if it just happened.





--
Peter Boy
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pboy
p...@fedoraproject.org

Timezone: CET (UTC+1) / CEST (UTC+2)


Fedora Server Edition Working Group member
Fedora docs team contributor
Java developer and enthusiast


___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: I have not been able to install F37 on a computer that has RAID1

[Tim via users]

Tim:
>> Briefly looking at RAID information, there are things that should be
>> unique, and there are some things that can be duplicated (not so sure
>> that they should be, though).  Drive IDs would need to be unique for
>> anything that uses IDs to differentiate one drive from other.  There's
>> partition and volume IDs that are used for different purposes.

Peter Boy:
> I agree. But it’s hard not to use  UIEDs and to ignore misconfigured
> UUIDs. Many Fedora tools use UUID by default, e.g. Cockpit and - if I
> remember correctly - dbus. Therefore, cloning a disc often ends up in
> more work than cloning saves. 

Since my experience with RAID is minimal (using a motherboard with
built-in hardware RAID that could not be shut-off on the drive ports I
had to use), I assume that if a mirror drive dies, you swap it, and let
the RAID do its own magic to incorporate the replacement drive into the
system, it handles filling up the new drive with partitions and data
from the other drive without cloning IDs.
 
-- 
 
uname -rsvp
Linux 3.10.0-1160.88.1.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Mar 7 15:41:52 UTC 2023 x86_64
 
Boilerplate:  All unexpected mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted.
I will only get to see the messages that are posted to the mailing list.
 
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: More space needed on the / filesystem to upgrade from F37 to F38

[Tim via users]

On Tue, 2023-05-02 at 10:13 +0200, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
> I will never understand why people are so inclined to restart from scratch
> with a new install every time.

Bad experience doing it in the past, and the huge number of times I've
read about the problems people have needed help to resolve on this
list.

> Their systems must be really bad managed to not trust an upgrade.

Nup.  And it's not a matter of trust, it's experience of things I
didn't want to repeat again.  It seriously wasted my time.  And without
any real good reason to put myself through that again.

> Or may be they have no customization at all to preserve.

That's not too far from the truth.  I don't customise my system that
much.  I spend most of the time using it, not tinkering with the
desktop.

When it comes to updates/upgrades, it's not just the OS to contend
with, but all the applications.  You find that some of the new versions
don't work with old configurations, and you have to configure them
again, anyway.

 
-- 
 
uname -rsvp
Linux 3.10.0-1160.88.1.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Mar 7 15:41:52 UTC 2023 x86_64
 
Boilerplate:  All unexpected mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted.
I will only get to see the messages that are posted to the mailing list.
 
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: More space needed on the / filesystem to upgrade from F37 to F38

[Tom Horsley]

On Tue, 2 May 2023 10:13:04 +0200
Roberto Ragusa wrote:

> I will never understand why people are so inclined to restart from scratch
> with a new install every time.

I treat it as an opportunity to get rid of stuff I no longer use.

I also keep the previous release around on a different partition in case
I need to investigate why something seems different I can boot back into
the older fedora.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: More fun with SSL certificates

[Chris Adams]

Once upon a time, Jeffrey Walton  said:
> On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 6:22 AM Patrick O'Callaghan
>  wrote:
> > # openssl x509 -in cert.pem -noout -text
> > Certificate:
> > Data:
> > Version: 3 (0x2)
> > Serial Number:
> > 04:ff:0e:50:c1:ee:21:26:7d:96:d1:97:5e:45:5a:d3:74:09
> > Signature Algorithm: sha256WithRSAEncryption
> > Issuer: C = US, O = Let's Encrypt, CN = R3
> > Validity
> > Not Before: May  1 21:20:11 2023 GMT
> > Not After : Jul 30 21:20:10 2023 GMT
> > Subject: CN = bree.org.uk
> > Subject Public Key Info:
> > Public Key Algorithm: id-ecPublicKey
> > Public-Key: (256 bit)
> > pub:
> > 04:68:eb:44:a1:68:a8:f9:a0:54:ee:6e:ec:15:02:
> > 5c:e8:a7:39:d0:32:11:9d:d4:71:52:85:64:49:74:
> > ca:cf:f3:ed:b5:c3:3c:45:cb:62:0d:4a:9b:cb:ae:
> > 27:51:aa:f8:22:65:dc:6d:8f:e7:5c:39:bd:28:a4:
> > 5e:d8:10:18:0b
> > ASN1 OID: prime256v1
> > NIST CURVE: P-256
> > ...
> 
> CN = R3 does not match Apache's ServerName.

You are looking at the Issuer field (i.e. the cert that was used to sign
this cert).  And also, the Subject CN is not referenced by browsers
anymore, only the subjectAltName DNS: entries (which were not shown).

However, checking the public certificate transparency logs, the above
cert is this one:

https://crt.sh/?id=9283300806

That has subjectAltName field of "DNS:bree.org.uk", which appears
correct.

-- 
Chris Adams 
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: More fun with SSL certificates

[Peter Boy]

> Am 02.05.2023 um 15:25 schrieb Jeffrey Walton :
> 
> On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 6:22 AM Patrick O'Callaghan
>  wrote:
>> 
>> On Mon, 2023-05-01 at 23:41 +0100, Barry wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
 On 1 May 2023, at 23:22, Patrick O'Callaghan
  wrote:
 
 My small web server appears to be working and even has https,
 however
 I've noticed this in /var/log/httpd/ssl_error_log:
 
 [...] AH01909: bree.org.uk:443:0 server certificate does NOT
 include an ID which matches the server name
 
 The ServerName is set to bree.org.uk, and that's the name under
 which I
 obtained the certificate, so I'm not sure what's going on here.
>>> 
>>> Have openssl turn your cert into readable text to check.
>>> From memory its this command.
>>> 
>>> $ openssl x509 -in your-cert -noout -text
>>> 
>>> Does it include SNI and your domain name?
>> 
>> # openssl x509 -in cert.pem -noout -text
>> Certificate:
>>Data:
>>Version: 3 (0x2)
>>Serial Number:
>>04:ff:0e:50:c1:ee:21:26:7d:96:d1:97:5e:45:5a:d3:74:09
>>Signature Algorithm: sha256WithRSAEncryption
>>Issuer: C = US, O = Let's Encrypt, CN = R3
>>Validity
>>Not Before: May  1 21:20:11 2023 GMT
>>Not After : Jul 30 21:20:10 2023 GMT
>>Subject: CN = bree.org.uk
>>Subject Public Key Info:
>>Public Key Algorithm: id-ecPublicKey
>>Public-Key: (256 bit)
>>pub:
>>04:68:eb:44:a1:68:a8:f9:a0:54:ee:6e:ec:15:02:
>>5c:e8:a7:39:d0:32:11:9d:d4:71:52:85:64:49:74:
>>ca:cf:f3:ed:b5:c3:3c:45:cb:62:0d:4a:9b:cb:ae:
>>27:51:aa:f8:22:65:dc:6d:8f:e7:5c:39:bd:28:a4:
>>5e:d8:10:18:0b
>>ASN1 OID: prime256v1
>>NIST CURVE: P-256
>> ...
> 
> CN = R3 does not match Apache's ServerName.

CN = R3 refers to the issuer, not your web server. As far as I can see, your 
certificates is OK.






--
Peter Boy
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pboy
p...@fedoraproject.org

Timezone: CET (UTC+1) / CEST (UTC+2)


Fedora Server Edition Working Group member
Fedora docs team contributor
Java developer and enthusiast


___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: More fun with SSL certificates

[Jeffrey Walton]

On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 6:22 AM Patrick O'Callaghan
 wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2023-05-01 at 23:41 +0100, Barry wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On 1 May 2023, at 23:22, Patrick O'Callaghan
> > >  wrote:
> > >
> > > My small web server appears to be working and even has https,
> > > however
> > > I've noticed this in /var/log/httpd/ssl_error_log:
> > >
> > > [...] AH01909: bree.org.uk:443:0 server certificate does NOT
> > > include an ID which matches the server name
> > >
> > > The ServerName is set to bree.org.uk, and that's the name under
> > > which I
> > > obtained the certificate, so I'm not sure what's going on here.
> >
> > Have openssl turn your cert into readable text to check.
> > From memory its this command.
> >
> > $ openssl x509 -in your-cert -noout -text
> >
> > Does it include SNI and your domain name?
>
> # openssl x509 -in cert.pem -noout -text
> Certificate:
> Data:
> Version: 3 (0x2)
> Serial Number:
> 04:ff:0e:50:c1:ee:21:26:7d:96:d1:97:5e:45:5a:d3:74:09
> Signature Algorithm: sha256WithRSAEncryption
> Issuer: C = US, O = Let's Encrypt, CN = R3
> Validity
> Not Before: May  1 21:20:11 2023 GMT
> Not After : Jul 30 21:20:10 2023 GMT
> Subject: CN = bree.org.uk
> Subject Public Key Info:
> Public Key Algorithm: id-ecPublicKey
> Public-Key: (256 bit)
> pub:
> 04:68:eb:44:a1:68:a8:f9:a0:54:ee:6e:ec:15:02:
> 5c:e8:a7:39:d0:32:11:9d:d4:71:52:85:64:49:74:
> ca:cf:f3:ed:b5:c3:3c:45:cb:62:0d:4a:9b:cb:ae:
> 27:51:aa:f8:22:65:dc:6d:8f:e7:5c:39:bd:28:a4:
> 5e:d8:10:18:0b
> ASN1 OID: prime256v1
> NIST CURVE: P-256
> ...

CN = R3 does not match Apache's ServerName.

Jeff
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: More fun with SSL certificates

[Peter Boy]

> Am 02.05.2023 um 12:23 schrieb Patrick O'Callaghan :
> 
> # httpd  -S
> VirtualHost configuration:
> *:80   bree.org.uk (/etc/httpd/conf.d/bree.conf:1)
> *:443  is a NameVirtualHost
>default server bree.org.uk (/etc/httpd/conf.d/bree-le-ssl.conf:2)
>port 443 namevhost bree.org.uk (/etc/httpd/conf.d/bree-le-ssl.conf:2)
>port 443 namevhost bree.org.uk (/etc/httpd/conf.d/ssl.conf:56)
> ServerRoot: "/etc/httpd"
> Main DocumentRoot: "/var/www/html“

We often encounter issues with a configuration as you have.

The problem is:
Your bree.org.uk address acts as a default server following apache’s naming 
convention (it is the first file sorting the file names alphabetically). At the 
same time a default vname server is configured in the default ssl configuration 
file (/etc/httpd/conf.d/ssl.conf:56). We often encounter problems in such a 
situation, when 2 configurations are effective at the same time. 

You may try either of the following

(a) define another named host with comes first in the alphabetical order, e.g. 
adefault.conf You may configure it minimally so it shows the default Fedora 
welcome page. It will only get used, if someone addresses your server by IP.

(b) comment out the default server at /etc/httpd/conf.d/ssl.conf:56 You may 
comment out all the lines between  and 
 provided you fully configure ssl in 
/etc/httpd/conf.d/bree-le-ssl.conf, i.e. include all the configuration option 
you find between both former directives of your own, probably customised, way. 
Or you may just comment out those  directives leaving the 
remaining directives as defaults. But this way sometimes results in conflict 
between the different certificate locations. The details of this conflict are 
not fully known yet.

Anyway, it would be helpful for us it you try it and give feedback about the 
results. 

Another possible issue is that port 80 is defined as 'main server' only, and 
port 443 has defined named server only. A more clean configuration is to define 
a port 80 server as a named server for bree.org.uk as well, that just redirects 
to port 443.









--
Peter Boy
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pboy
p...@fedoraproject.org

Timezone: CET (UTC+1) / CEST (UTC+2)


Fedora Server Edition Working Group member
Fedora docs team contributor
Java developer and enthusiast


___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: More fun with SSL certificates

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Tue, 2023-05-02 at 16:51 +0930, Tim via users wrote:
> On Mon, 2023-05-01 at 23:21 +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > My small web server appears to be working and even has https,
> > however
> > I've noticed this in /var/log/httpd/ssl_error_log:
> > 
> > [...] AH01909: bree.org.uk:443:0 server certificate does NOT
> > include an ID which matches the server name
> > 
> > The ServerName is set to bree.org.uk, and that's the name under
> > which I
> > obtained the certificate, so I'm not sure what's going on here.
> 
> Since the site isn't loading at the moment, I can't look at things. 
> But...
> 

Apologies, I suspend the machine at night to save on electricity (as I
said, it's just for personal use) so it would have been off when you
tried. It suspends at about 3am local time (UK) and I wake it manually
in the morning. As I'm retired, this can vary from day to day.

> It's typical to make sure that domain name and any subdomains you
> might
> use, or other people might use, are included.  In your case, that'd
> be
> bree.org.uk and www.bree.org.uk.  Whether or not you intend to use
> the
> www subdomain, other people might do it automatically.  It's as well
> to
> prepare for it.
> 

I'm aware of that and intend to do it once I figure it out.

> And you may want to include mail servers, if you'll use the same
> certificate with them (now, or in the future).  Some people do a
> wildcard (e.g. *.bree.org.uk).  It could be a bit of future proofing.
> But if you're in the position of regularly updating your certificate,
> you can just add things as you want to.
> 

I don't envisage running a mail server, but sure.

> A problem with SSL used to be (and can still be with some things), is
> that while you could have a multitude of different HTTP servers at
> the
> same IP address (the browser connecting would include the desired
> websites's *name* in the request, the server would look at that and
> serve you the correct website), that *wasn't* possible with HTTPS but
> *now* is.  The more recent addition of SNI into the HTTPS connection
> allowed that requested site's name to go into the request when you
> connect to the IP.
> 

It doesn't seem to have an SNI entry (see my reply to Barry).


poc
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: More fun with SSL certificates

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Tue, 2023-05-02 at 10:39 +0200, Peter Boy wrote:
> 
> 
> > Am 02.05.2023 um 00:21 schrieb Patrick O'Callaghan
> > :
> > 
> > My small web server appears to be working and even has https,
> > however
> > I've noticed this in /var/log/httpd/ssl_error_log:
> > 
> > [...] AH01909: bree.org.uk:443:0 server certificate does NOT
> > include an ID which matches the server name
> > 
> > The ServerName is set to bree.org.uk, and that's the name under
> > which I
> > obtained the certificate, so I'm not sure what's going on here.
> > 
> > poc
> 
> Your http service is currently not publicly responding. It you can
> access it locally, klick in your browser on the certificate symbol
> (in Firefox left of the address). Klick on „secure connection“ and
> then on „additional information“ to see the certificate details. If
> you use letsencrypt certificates, use „lets encrypt certificates“ to
> list the details of all certificates. 
> 
> Otherwise, the error message is typical for a missing explicit
> configuration of the server name with simultaneous failure of the
> built-in auto-configuration of the name.
> 
> Try „httpd  -S“ to list the recognised configuration and check the
> services for port 80 and   443

# httpd  -S
VirtualHost configuration:
*:80   bree.org.uk (/etc/httpd/conf.d/bree.conf:1)
*:443  is a NameVirtualHost
 default server bree.org.uk (/etc/httpd/conf.d/bree-le-ssl.conf:2)
 port 443 namevhost bree.org.uk (/etc/httpd/conf.d/bree-le-ssl.conf:2)
 port 443 namevhost bree.org.uk (/etc/httpd/conf.d/ssl.conf:56)
ServerRoot: "/etc/httpd"
Main DocumentRoot: "/var/www/html"
Main ErrorLog: "/etc/httpd/logs/error_log"
Mutex rewrite-map: using_defaults
Mutex ssl-stapling-refresh: using_defaults
Mutex authdigest-client: using_defaults
Mutex lua-ivm-shm: using_defaults
Mutex ssl-stapling: using_defaults
Mutex proxy: using_defaults
Mutex authn-socache: using_defaults
Mutex ssl-cache: using_defaults
Mutex default: dir="/etc/httpd/run/" mechanism=default 
Mutex cache-socache: using_defaults
Mutex authdigest-opaque: using_defaults
Mutex watchdog-callback: using_defaults
Mutex proxy-balancer-shm: using_defaults
PidFile: "/etc/httpd/run/httpd.pid"
Define: DUMP_VHOSTS
Define: DUMP_RUN_CFG
User: name="apache" id=48
Group: name="apache" id=48

poc
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: More fun with SSL certificates

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Mon, 2023-05-01 at 23:41 +0100, Barry wrote:
> 
> 
> > On 1 May 2023, at 23:22, Patrick O'Callaghan
> >  wrote:
> > 
> > My small web server appears to be working and even has https,
> > however
> > I've noticed this in /var/log/httpd/ssl_error_log:
> > 
> > [...] AH01909: bree.org.uk:443:0 server certificate does NOT
> > include an ID which matches the server name
> > 
> > The ServerName is set to bree.org.uk, and that's the name under
> > which I
> > obtained the certificate, so I'm not sure what's going on here.
> 
> Have openssl turn your cert into readable text to check.
> From memory its this command.
> 
> $ openssl x509 -in your-cert -noout -text
> 
> Does it include SNI and your domain name?

# openssl x509 -in cert.pem -noout -text
Certificate:
Data:
Version: 3 (0x2)
Serial Number:
04:ff:0e:50:c1:ee:21:26:7d:96:d1:97:5e:45:5a:d3:74:09
Signature Algorithm: sha256WithRSAEncryption
Issuer: C = US, O = Let's Encrypt, CN = R3
Validity
Not Before: May  1 21:20:11 2023 GMT
Not After : Jul 30 21:20:10 2023 GMT
Subject: CN = bree.org.uk
Subject Public Key Info:
Public Key Algorithm: id-ecPublicKey
Public-Key: (256 bit)
pub:
04:68:eb:44:a1:68:a8:f9:a0:54:ee:6e:ec:15:02:
5c:e8:a7:39:d0:32:11:9d:d4:71:52:85:64:49:74:
ca:cf:f3:ed:b5:c3:3c:45:cb:62:0d:4a:9b:cb:ae:
27:51:aa:f8:22:65:dc:6d:8f:e7:5c:39:bd:28:a4:
5e:d8:10:18:0b
ASN1 OID: prime256v1
NIST CURVE: P-256
...

There is no SNI entry.

poc
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: I have not been able to install F37 on a computer that has RAID1

[Peter Boy]

> Am 02.05.2023 um 09:05 schrieb Tim via users :
> 
> On Mon, 2023-05-01 at 23:12 +0200, Peter Boy wrote:
>> I think, no system can use 2 disk which have the same UUID at the
>> same time (besides maybe one of the Windows BIOS fake controller).
>> Duplicate UUID is a contradictio in adiecto and should be fixed.
> 
> Just a guess, but it probably could, if you didn't use the UUIDs to
> mount the drives by.  Such as you mounted them by device names, or
> volume names.  Though, I think it'd be best not to have cloned IDs.
> 
> Briefly looking at RAID information, there are things that should be
> unique, and there are some things that can be duplicated (not so sure
> that they should be, though).  Drive IDs would need to be unique for
> anything that uses IDs to differentiate one drive from other.  There's
> partition and volume IDs that are used for different purposes.

I agree. But it’s hard not to use  UIEDs and to ignore misconfigured UUIDs. 
Many Fedora tools use UUID by default, e.g. Cockpit and - if I remember 
correctly - dbus. Therefore, cloning a disc often ends up in more work than 
cloning saves. 



 


--
Peter Boy
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pboy
p...@fedoraproject.org

Timezone: CET (UTC+1) / CEST (UTC+2)


Fedora Server Edition Working Group member
Fedora docs team contributor
Java developer and enthusiast


___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: More fun with SSL certificates

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Mon, 2023-05-01 at 21:17 -0400, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> On Mon, May 1, 2023 at 6:22 PM Patrick O'Callaghan
>  wrote:
> > 
> > My small web server appears to be working and even has https,
> > however
> > I've noticed this in /var/log/httpd/ssl_error_log:
> > 
> > [...] AH01909: bree.org.uk:443:0 server certificate does NOT
> > include an ID which matches the server name
> > 
> > The ServerName is set to bree.org.uk, and that's the name under
> > which I
> > obtained the certificate, so I'm not sure what's going on here.
> 
> Sorry to go offlist.
> 
> It looks like your server is misconfigured. bree.org.uk and
> www.bree.org.uk both fail at
> https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=www.bree.org.uk .
> 
> Here are my notes on setting up the Crypto++ web server:
> https://github.com/weidai11/website/blob/master/install/apache-php.txt
> .

Thanks, I'll look at that. Note that it's bree.org.uk, not
www.bree.org.uk (I may include a wildcard once I figure out how to do
that).

poc
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Converting ext4 to btrfs

[Alex Gurenko via users]

I've forgot to add, that for compression, this, again, works only for newly 
created/accesses files only, so after adding compression to fstab (and reboot), 
you might want to run a defragmentation `sudo btrfs filesystem defragment -r 
`.

There was a recent article about that too: 
https://fedoramagazine.org/working-with-btrfs-compression/

---
Best regards, Alex


--- Original Message ---
On Tuesday, May 2nd, 2023 at 12:04, Alex Gurenko  
wrote:


> There was an article back in the days of btrfs introduction that described 
> the process: https://fedoramagazine.org/convert-your-filesystem-to-btrfs/
> 
> I've used it myself without any issues back then, I would assume it's still 
> safe to do so now.
> 
> I ran it like this for a few more releases without issues, until I decided to 
> re-install fresh.
> 
> The only downside would probably be (please keep me honest here), the 
> defaults might not apply.
> 
> There are few things that are done on a fresh install, which will probably 
> won't apply on a converted system:
> 
> - COW (copy-on-write) disabled for /var/lib/libvirt/images
> - probably on other directories?
> - can be done manually with `chattr -R +C ` but it only works for new 
> files in said path, so you might need to move things out and back in
> 
> - enable compression by making sure fstab includes `,compress=zstd:1`
> - based on your position on async discard [0], you might want to add 
> `nodiscard` to fstab as well, but it seems to be okay with latest fixes 
> kernels 6.2.13+ or 6.3.0, at least on a desktop
> 
> [0] 
> https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/btrfs-discard-storm-on-fedora/79997/28
> 
> ---
> Best regards, Alex
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- Original Message ---
> On Tuesday, May 2nd, 2023 at 11:29, Paul Smith phh...@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> > Dear All,
> > 
> > I have always upgraded Fedora from the previously installed version.
> > Consequently, I still have ext4. To have btrfs, is it needed to do a
> > Fedora clean install?
> > 
> > Thanks in advance,
> > 
> > Paul
> > ___
> > users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > Fedora Code of Conduct: 
> > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> > List Archives: 
> > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > Do not reply to spam, report it: 
> > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Converting ext4 to btrfs

[Alex Gurenko via users]

There was an article back in the days of btrfs introduction that described the 
process: https://fedoramagazine.org/convert-your-filesystem-to-btrfs/

I've used it myself without any issues back then, I would assume it's still 
safe to do so now.

I ran it like this for a few more releases without issues, until I decided to 
re-install fresh.

The only downside would probably be (please keep me honest here), the defaults 
might not apply.

There are few things that are done on a fresh install, which will _probably_ 
won't apply on a converted system:

- COW (copy-on-write) disabled for /var/lib/libvirt/images
  - probably on other directories?
  - can be done manually with `chattr -R +C ` but it only works for new 
files in said path, so you might need to move things out and back in
- enable compression by making sure fstab includes `,compress=zstd:1`
- based on your position on async discard [0], you might want to add 
`nodiscard` to fstab as well, but it seems to be okay with latest fixes kernels 
6.2.13+ or 6.3.0, at least on a desktop

[0] 
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/btrfs-discard-storm-on-fedora/79997/28

---
Best regards, Alex


--- Original Message ---
On Tuesday, May 2nd, 2023 at 11:29, Paul Smith  wrote:


> Dear All,
> 
> I have always upgraded Fedora from the previously installed version.
> Consequently, I still have ext4. To have btrfs, is it needed to do a
> Fedora clean install?
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> 
> Paul
> ___
> users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: 
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it: 
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Converting ext4 to btrfs

[Paul Smith]

Dear All,

I have always upgraded Fedora from the previously installed version.
Consequently, I still have ext4. To have btrfs, is it needed to do a
Fedora clean install?

Thanks in advance,

Paul
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: More fun with SSL certificates

[Peter Boy]

> Am 02.05.2023 um 00:21 schrieb Patrick O'Callaghan :
> 
> My small web server appears to be working and even has https, however
> I've noticed this in /var/log/httpd/ssl_error_log:
> 
> [...] AH01909: bree.org.uk:443:0 server certificate does NOT include an ID 
> which matches the server name
> 
> The ServerName is set to bree.org.uk, and that's the name under which I
> obtained the certificate, so I'm not sure what's going on here.
> 
> poc

Your http service is currently not publicly responding. It you can access it 
locally, klick in your browser on the certificate symbol (in Firefox left of 
the address). Klick on „secure connection“ and then on „additional information“ 
to see the certificate details. If you use letsencrypt certificates, use „lets 
encrypt certificates“ to list the details of all certificates. 

Otherwise, the error message is typical for a missing explicit configuration of 
the server name with simultaneous failure of the built-in auto-configuration of 
the name.

Try „httpd  -S“ to list the recognised configuration and check the services for 
port 80 and   443






--
Peter Boy
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pboy
p...@fedoraproject.org

Timezone: CET (UTC+1) / CEST (UTC+2)


Fedora Server Edition Working Group member
Fedora docs team contributor
Java developer and enthusiast


___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: More space needed on the / filesystem to upgrade from F37 to F38

[Roberto Ragusa]

On 5/1/23 01:18, Felix Miata wrote:


It's been over 42 months since I last booted a Fedora installer (to a 5.3 
kernel).
Upgrading Fedora has worked in excess of 100 times here (15 multiboot PCs with
it). On faster machines, allocating as much as an hour for the process is a 
gross
excess. On less weighty installations it probably can take under 10 minutes if 
you
don't include POSTing time that on some machines takes longer than booting an 
OS.


I will never understand why people are so inclined to restart from scratch
with a new install every time.
Their systems must be really bad managed to not trust an upgrade.
Or may be they have no customization at all to preserve.
My personal system was installed with FC3 in 2005 and then continuously
upgraded up to currently FC36.
(it has even got metamorphosis from i686 to x86_64, something that was 
considered
impossible to do)

Regards.
--
   Roberto Ragusamail at robertoragusa.it
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: More fun with SSL certificates

[Tim via users]

On Mon, 2023-05-01 at 23:21 +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> My small web server appears to be working and even has https, however
> I've noticed this in /var/log/httpd/ssl_error_log:
> 
> [...] AH01909: bree.org.uk:443:0 server certificate does NOT include an ID 
> which matches the server name
> 
> The ServerName is set to bree.org.uk, and that's the name under which I
> obtained the certificate, so I'm not sure what's going on here.

Since the site isn't loading at the moment, I can't look at things. 
But...

It's typical to make sure that domain name and any subdomains you might
use, or other people might use, are included.  In your case, that'd be
bree.org.uk and www.bree.org.uk.  Whether or not you intend to use the
www subdomain, other people might do it automatically.  It's as well to
prepare for it.

And you may want to include mail servers, if you'll use the same
certificate with them (now, or in the future).  Some people do a
wildcard (e.g. *.bree.org.uk).  It could be a bit of future proofing. 
But if you're in the position of regularly updating your certificate,
you can just add things as you want to.

A problem with SSL used to be (and can still be with some things), is
that while you could have a multitude of different HTTP servers at the
same IP address (the browser connecting would include the desired
websites's *name* in the request, the server would look at that and
serve you the correct website), that *wasn't* possible with HTTPS but
*now* is.  The more recent addition of SNI into the HTTPS connection
allowed that requested site's name to go into the request when you
connect to the IP.

Because it's a newer scheme, it could fail with older things, but I
think we should be well past that era, by now.

Other issues such as reverse DNS lookups matching the forward
DNS lookups are probably less of an issue than it used to be.  With the
advent of virtual hosts, rather than every site having its own IP, it
became an impossible requirement.  Though I still have that with mail
server on my host.  When I fetch my mail, I have to ignore that the
host's certificate is inappropriate for my email's domain name.

-- 
 
uname -rsvp
Linux 3.10.0-1160.88.1.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Mar 7 15:41:52 UTC 2023 x86_64
 
Boilerplate:  All unexpected mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted.
I will only get to see the messages that are posted to the mailing list.
 
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: I have not been able to install F37 on a computer that has RAID1

[Tim via users]

On Mon, 2023-05-01 at 23:12 +0200, Peter Boy wrote:
> I think, no system can use 2 disk which have the same UUID at the
> same time (besides maybe one of the Windows BIOS fake controller).
> Duplicate UUID is a contradictio in adiecto and should be fixed.

Just a guess, but it probably could, if you didn't use the UUIDs to
mount the drives by.  Such as you mounted them by device names, or
volume names.  Though, I think it'd be best not to have cloned IDs.

Briefly looking at RAID information, there are things that should be
unique, and there are some things that can be duplicated (not so sure
that they should be, though).  Drive IDs would need to be unique for
anything that uses IDs to differentiate one drive from other.  There's
partition and volume IDs that are used for different purposes.


-- 
 
uname -rsvp
Linux 3.10.0-1160.88.1.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Mar 7 15:41:52 UTC 2023 x86_64
 
Boilerplate:  All unexpected mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted.
I will only get to see the messages that are posted to the mailing list.
 
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue