Re: Fedora 40: the last four(!) kernels fail - also the latest kernel 6.10-7-200.fc40.x86_64

[Walter H. via users]

On 07.09.2024 14:18, Maarten Hoes wrote:

I have no idea when this will be fixed (or not). However, I personally was able to 
work around it by *enabling* '3D Acceleration" in the VM settings (under 
display) for my Fedora 40 VM. You could try to see if that works for you.


I enabled '3D Acceleration' and it worked;

so there should be done a ReadMe or similar, where this should be noted, 
that for VMware Guests, and X the '3D Acceleration' must be enabled;


just for info: can you look, whether your VM with Arch also has '3D 
Acceleration' enabled


Greetings,

Walter




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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

Fedora 40: the last four(!) kernels fail - also the latest kernel 6.10-7-200.fc40.x86_64

[Walter H. via users]

just what had been said by some else
(Maarten Hoes )

"Just to do some verification, I tried running an Arch Linux guest with 
kernel 6.10.6 using the same VMWare Workstation install, and that boots 
perfectly fine.


So whatever this turns out to be, it's not just a simple 'VMWare needs to be 
updated for the latest kernel' issue: latest Arch seems to be doing something 
different here than Fedora 40, resulting in the fact that the same kernel will 
boot in Arch and not in Fedora (and this needs to be investigated). Either
that or, I have made different configuration choices when creating these VM's (I 
cannot recall what choices I made during VM configuration for Arch)."

when will this be fixed?


On 23.08.2024 19:52, Walter H. via users wrote:

These three kernels

kernel-6.10.4-200.fc40.x86_64
kernel-6.10.5-200.fc40.x86_64
kernel-6.10.6-200.fc40.x86_64

won't start my VM properly, ends in a black screen,
where I can see mouse moventments, and that was it ...
no login, nothing;

kernel-6.10.3-200.fc40.x86_64 works fine

using LXDM

Thanks

Walter









smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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: Fedora 40: the last three kernels fail

[Walter H. via users]

I'm running 16.2.4 and tried on 17.5.2

and yes, you can do SSH , and do
e.g.  shutdown -h now
or cat  |...

my Host system is Windows 10

On 27.08.2024 09:15, Will McDonald wrote:

So there's a common problem here with VMWare Workstation and f40?

What version of workstation are you both running?
What are you running on, Windows 10, 11, something else?

When your VMs boot with the new kernels, but blank screens, are the 
IPs connected to the appropriate virtual network? Can you ping and/or 
SSH into the VMs?


Have you tried booting into text-only mode in case the issue is 
specifically display manager related?


https://www.reddit.com/r/Fedora/comments/1d18b6d/anyone_having_trouble_with_fedora_40_kde_and/ 
looks promising?


Specifically: 
https://www.reddit.com/r/Fedora/comments/1d18b6d/comment/l78k8ag/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button




On Mon, 26 Aug 2024 at 22:10, Maarten Hoes > wrote:


Hi,


I'm also running VMWare Workstation, and am experiencing the exact
same issue. On Fedora 40, using the kernels 6.10.4, 6.10.5, and
6.10.6 result in an unbootable vm, and the last Fedora 40 kernel
that worked was 6.10.3.

Just to do some verification, I tried running an Arch Linux guest
with kernel 6.10.6 using the same VMWare Workstation install, and
that boots perfectly fine.

So whatever this turns out to be, it's not just a simple 'VMWare
needs to be updated for the latest kernel' issue: latest Arch
seems to be doing something different here than Fedora 40,
resulting in the fact that the same kernel will boot in Arch and
not in Fedora (and this needs to be investigated). Either that or,
I have made different configuration choices when creating these
VM's (I cannot recall what choices I made during VM configuration
for Arch).

PS:
For now, as a temporary workaround, you 'could' choose to add the
following line to /etc/dnf/dnf.conf :
exclude=kernel kernel-core kernel-devel kernel-modules
kernel-modules-core kernel-modules-extra
which will prevent dnf from updating the kernel when you do a
'sudo dnf update'.
-- 
___

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






smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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: Fedora 40: the last three kernels fail

[Walter H. via users]

On 25.08.2024 21:40, Barry Scott wrote:



On 25 Aug 2024, at 11:43, Walter H. via users 
 wrote:


or the kernels later than 6.10.3 are buggy and this need to be fixed(!)

I tried the VM with latest VMware Wkstn. - same problem


As I said VMware has a history of breaking on new kernels.
Their hypervisor appears to "know" about the linux kernel and some 
time what it knows needs updating

I do not recall the linux kernel being fixed with VMware boot breaks.

I wouldn't name it 'boot breaks', with these kernels the VM boots, for a 
very short moment the loading of init or whatever could be seen
then graphicsmode and only black, where mouse movements are the only 
thing that could be seen;


the problem might be because there the

dnf update

didn't do updating, installing all neccessary?

Thanks,

Walter



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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: Fedora 40: the last three kernels fail

[Walter H. via users]

On 25.08.2024 09:53, Barry wrote:



On 25 Aug 2024, at 08:50, Walter H. via users  
wrote:


I have not used vmware for a long time, but when I did it was
sometimes necessary to wait for vmware to fix something before a new
kernel would work.

I have nothing installed from vmware, the vmware tools

It’s the vmware hypervisor that may need a fix for the host to work.
Not the vmware tools for the guest.


or the kernels later than 6.10.3 are buggy and this need to be fixed(!)

I tried the VM with latest VMware Wkstn. - same problem




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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: Fedora 40: the last three kernels fail

[Walter H. via users]

On 25.08.2024 09:37, Barry wrote:



On 24 Aug 2024, at 14:47, Walter H. via users  
wrote:

it is a VMware Guest

I have not used vmware for a long time, but when I did it was
sometimes necessary to wait for vmware to fix something before a new
kernel would work.


I have nothing installed from vmware, the vmware tools

open-vm-tools.x86_64   12.4.0-1.fc40


Suspect you need to install a 6.9 kernel and test that.


the kernel-6.10.3-200.fc40.x86_64 kernel works fine,

but when I do

dnf update

I get a newer kernel, and then bang

dnf doesn't ask for each packet, it ask once for all packets :-(


Walter





smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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: Fedora 40: the last three kernels fail

[Walter H. via users]

On 24.08.2024 13:40, Robert McBroom via users wrote:



On 8/23/24 1:52 PM, Walter H. via users wrote:

These three kernels

kernel-6.10.4-200.fc40.x86_64
kernel-6.10.5-200.fc40.x86_64
kernel-6.10.6-200.fc40.x86_64

won't start my VM properly, ends in a black screen,
where I can see mouse moventments, and that was it ...
no login, nothing;

kernel-6.10.3-200.fc40.x86_64 works fine

using LXDM

Thanks


Walter


Similar system, doesn't initialize.  Have had to use

systemctl start libvirtd

from a command window. Works then.



libvirt isn't installed;

it is a VMware Guest

what happened, since these 3 kernels;
after dnf update I just removed the last installed kernel
in order to get
kernel-6.10.3-200.fc40.x86_64
as the latest kernel and the system works;

is there a solution, to use the latest kernel?

Thanks,

Walter



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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

Fedora 40: the last three kernels fail

[Walter H. via users]

These three kernels

kernel-6.10.4-200.fc40.x86_64
kernel-6.10.5-200.fc40.x86_64
kernel-6.10.6-200.fc40.x86_64

won't start my VM properly, ends in a black screen,
where I can see mouse moventments, and that was it ...
no login, nothing;

kernel-6.10.3-200.fc40.x86_64 works fine

using LXDM

Thanks

Walter






smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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: failing https://lists.fedorahosted.org/admin/lists/freeotp-devel.lists.fedorahosted.org/

[Walter H. via users]

On 08.04.2024 15:32, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:

Checked
https://www.isitdownrightnow.com/lists.fedorahosted.org.html


answer failed

the URL in question is

https://lists.fedorahosted.org/admin/lists/freeotp-devel.lists.fedorahosted.org/


And shows it hasn't been down for over a week? So probable
something local.


On 8 Apr 2024 at 10:57, Walter H. via users wrote:

To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject:failing

https://lists.fedorahosted.org/admin/lists/freeotp-devel.lists.fedorahosted.org/
Organization:   Home
Date sent:  Mon, 8 Apr 2024 10:57:02 +0200
Send reply to:  Community support for Fedora users 

From:   "Walter H. via users" 
Copies to:  "Walter H." 


always get 500





++
  Michael D. Setzer II - Computer Science Instructor (Retired)
  mailto:mi...@guam.net
  mailto:msetze...@gmail.com
  mailto:msetze...@gmx.com
  Guam - Where America's Day Begins
  G4L Disk Imaging Project maintainer
  http://sourceforge.net/projects/g4l/
++


--
___
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






smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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

failing https://lists.fedorahosted.org/admin/lists/freeotp-devel.lists.fedorahosted.org/

[Walter H. via users]

always get 500




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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: How do I read result of a QR Code

[Walter H. via users]

On 20.01.2024 20:52, Chris Adams wrote:

Once upon a time, Tim  said:

That's one of my gripes about two-factor authentication - it
(typically) uses your phone.  Steal someone's phone, and it's
everything they need to pretend to be you.

That's going to be true of any second-factor device.  In theory, MFA is
"something you know plus something you have", but we use too many
passwords to "know" them all, so we use password managers.
password managers/safes are ok as long as they are independent from the 
device used for login ...

Then the
"know" is just one password manager master password... but the "have" is
often stored in the same password manager (because where else are you
going to store it?).
a tip: don't store the whole password; e.g. use the stored passwords 
plus something short only in your head;
it might be the same to all used passwords; 3 or 4 signs are enough, 
e.g. '#A7x'

I know, if doing like this, the password manager isn't simple any more; but
as always said: simplicity and security don't go together;




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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: How do I read result of a QR Code

[Walter H. via users]

On 20.01.2024 20:39, Tim via users wrote:

On Sat, 2024-01-20 at 20:00 +0100, Walter H. via users wrote:

buy an iPhone ...

exact this what you want is the other way of it sense;

2FA = 2 Factor Authentication

example you login on a site, there you have the knowledge of

user and password

and then the 2nd factor, which is a OTP

when you really do this with your fedora, then there is NO 2nd factor,
because when your fedora gets compromised, the 2FA gets compromised, too

That's one of my gripes about two-factor authentication - it
(typically) uses your phone.  Steal someone's phone, and it's
everything they need to pretend to be you.
  


not really, because, the knowledge of user and password is somewhere else;

so neither the person who stole your phone (the 2FA device) nor you are 
able to login;


you should not use the phone as all in one:
- the login device,
- the 2FA device and also
- the password manager device




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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: How do I read result of a QR Code

[Walter H. via users]

On 17.01.2024 01:54, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

On 1/16/24 15:44, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 1/16/24 15:42, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 1/16/24 14:58, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

On 1/16/24 14:29, Barry wrote:



On 16 Jan 2024, at 20:43, ToddAndMargo via users 
 wrote:


"keysmith" looks like it is "creating" the things, not
reading them.  Am I missing something?


You mean creating the 6 digit codes? Isn’t that the point?

Barry


The opposite!

I want to decode the Roshack splotch (OTP) when it is
presented to me, so I can enter the number into the
multifactor authentication challenge.


You are misunderstanding how this works.  That QR code contains a 
secret value that lets the OTP application generate the 6 digit 
codes as needed.  There is no actual code in the QR code.


To clarify further, you only need the QR code *once*.  After that, 
you use the application to give you the code you need when asked for.



This what I am after.  A program presents a QC splotch.  A
user scans it with their Android phone and reads it into
FreeOTP.  FreeOTP coughs out a six digit code, which
I enter.

I want to do this without the Android. 


buy an iPhone ...

exact this what you want is the other way of it sense;

2FA = 2 Factor Authentication

example you login on a site, there you have the knowledge of

user and password

and then the 2nd factor, which is a OTP

when you really do this with your fedora, then there is NO 2nd factor,
because when your fedora gets compromised, the 2FA gets compromised, too





smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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: Strange Firefox - Invalid representation

[Walter H. via users]

On 26.12.2023 01:13, Tim via users wrote:

On Mon, 2023-12-25 at 14:21 +0100, Walter H. via users wrote:

Have you tried this?
https://hosting117696.a2f78.netcup.net/xchg/_banking.zip


If I then try loading the files inside the zip file into a web browser
I get pages with blank sections, and looking a bit similar to yours
(minus the stock photo of telephonists) but then I suspect it's missing
content from the web.

correct; my result was a direkt screen shot from the real view;

First and second impressions are that the service isn't providing
useful content rather than the web browser being at fault.  But,
however, and this caught me for a while:  I just tried expanding my
browser window to be wider, and TADA!  I'm seeing tabular data, albeit
no monetary values are visible (just hash marks).  CRAP DESIGN!

the hash marks was just me, I replaced the monetary values with hash marks;

A snippet from _abrechnungen.html
AbrechnungszeitraumAbrechnungsbetragDokument
15.11.2023 - 14.12.2023 EUR -#,## Kreditkartenabrechnung-20231215.pdf
15.10.2023 - 14.11.2023 EUR -#,## Kreditkartenabrechnung-20231115.pdf

A snippet from _umsaetze.html
RAIFFEISEN CardService Umsätze
Reserviert23.12.2023Shop #, City #EUR -#,##EUR -#,##
Reserviert23.12.2023Shop #, City #EUR -#,##EUR -#,##

The PDF references look like they ought to be clickable links, but they
don't appear to be interactive in any way.

Looking at the two HTML files in a text editor, I can see they're chock
full of styling and drawing code, and lots of references to font and
JavaScript files which aren't included in the zip file, but I haven't
seen any obvious data in the content.  It's a huge blob to try and look
through, though.  I see a collection of numbers at the bottom that's
probably SVG data, but I can't read it directly.  I'd call it a huge
messy way to try and display a tiny bit of data.

I hope it doesn't contain any private data, because you've just made it
completely public.

don't worry, the private data were replaced with the hash marks;

I could upload a screenshot of how it rendered if you want, and if
widening your browser window doesn't help you, but since it may be
private data I don't want to make the situation worse.  Your call...


that was the solution but I wonder why this is just now;

I run a VM for banking; a Fedora; in June this year a made a backup - 
Fedora 38 and Firefox 114;

this has the same strange behaviour now, but worked correctly in June ...

my worksation is a Windows 10 - the VMware Host; and any VMware Guest - 
Linux with a GUI(X11) or even other Windows are

set with a resolution of 1280x1024;

there I could try any Linux, a Debian, a Ubuntu, a SuSE, a Fedora, a MX, 
a CentOS with all the same result;


Thanks for your hint;

I changed the resolution of the Banking VM to 1400x1050 and now it shows 
correct,


until the bank does another bug  ...

Walter




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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: Strange Firefox - Invalid representation

[Walter H. via users]

Have you tried this?

https://hosting117696.a2f78.netcup.net/xchg/_banking.zip



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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: Strange Firefox - Invalid representation

[Walter H. via users]

with Windows this problem doesn't exist with Firefox, I tried
Firefox with Fedora, CentOS, Debian and there exists the Problem;

faking the useragent with Linux, no solution

downloading
https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/115.6.0esr/linux-x86_64/en-US/
unpacking and just starting the file 'firefox' the same result
(also with removing the fedora firefox package  'dnf -y remove firefox')

Walter

On Sun, Dec 24, 2023 at 4:58 PM Walter H. via users 
 wrote:


> It's been my experience that the problem is likely with the website,
> not the browser. Oftentimes, misbehaving websites only test against
> Chrome, or Chrome and Edge. They often neglect Firefox. And if you
> inspect the JavaScript, you will see code paths carved out like that.
>
> You should probably contact the website developers and ask them to 
support Firefox.

>
> Jeff




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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

Strange Firefox - Invalid representation

[Walter H. via users]

Hello,

I'm using for electronic banking a Fedora as VM guest on my Windows 
Workstation;


actually Firefox 121.0

I've here a .ZIP-file containing two HTML-Files and a _files-Folder with 
a few other files (JS, image, ...)

(did a download of the whole page, edited the HTML to remove data)

https://hosting117696.a2f78.netcup.net/xchg/_banking.zip

if someone sees the same behaviour like me - 
https://pasteboard.co/WSoV3DatoWve.png


please tell the developer to fix this

Thanks,

Walter







smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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: Who is the problem kid: Win10 or Fedora?

[Walter H. via users]

On 16.07.2023 15:11, francis.montag...@inria.fr wrote:

Hi

On Sun, 16 Jul 2023 14:48:04 +0200 "Walter H. via users" wrote:


ssh -vvv didn't really give any useful hints; I guess the problem is NOT
caused by just the key;

Although a ED25519 one works ?

yes this does ...

You may perhaps find the reason in the journal of sshd on the Fedora VM.


sshd[159804]: userauth_pubkey: signature algorithm rsa-sha2-512 not in 
PubkeyAcceptedAlgorithms [preauth]


what does this mean?

because this is in the journal even when login by ssh with the ED25519 
key ...


quite strange;

at the time where I noticed this unorthodox weird strange problem, the 
journal has this:


Jul 12 02:40:42 fedoravm sshd[142305]: userauth_pubkey: signature 
algorithm rsa-sha2-512 not in PubkeyAcceptedAlgorithms [preauth]
Jul 12 02:41:08 fedoravm sshd[142305]: Accepted password for root from 
win10-ipv6>

Jul 12 02:41:28 fedoravm sshd[735]: Received signal 15; terminating.

(I entered the password, because the key wasn't working any more)

I have the workaround with the ed25519 key - if it works why not ;-)



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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: Who is the problem kid: Win10 or Fedora?

[Walter H. via users]

On 14.07.2023 21:26, Barry wrote:



On 14 Jul 2023, at 19:01, Walter H. via users  
wrote:

ssh -i id_rsa  youruser@fedorahost

doesn't work

this is quite strange; because the same keyfiles works from another Linux [not 
Fedora]

what's causing this strange behaviour?

In cases like this I run ssh with debug option to see what is happening.
Try ssh -v and see of the output help point to the problem.
Adding more -vvv outputs more debug details.

Barry

ssh -vvv didn't really give any useful hints; I guess the problem is NOT 
caused by just the key;


I found this: https://kcore.org/2023/03/27/ssh-unifi-fedora-37/

(the key would be suitable: it is a RSA 2048 bit key)

but I don't want to set the crypto policies on the Fedora VM to LEGACY

for connecting to the Fedora VM I created an ED25519 key
(https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/administration/openssh/openssh_keymanagement)

and now it works: the RSA key to the other Linux VMs and the ED25519 key 
just to the Fedora VM;


but quite strange phenomen;

Walter





smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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: Who is the problem kid: Win10 or Fedora?

[Walter H. via users]

On 14.07.2023 18:23, francis.montag...@inria.fr wrote:

Hi.

On Fri, 14 Jul 2023 16:22:56 +0200 "Walter H. via users" wrote:


I added this inside the Fedora in the sshd_config
HostKeyAlgorithms +ssh-rsa
PubkeyAcceptedKeyTypes ssh-rsa
then the login using the keys from WSL were working again;
but why didn't this help to login using the keys via the Win 10 OpenSSH
commands;

Since openssh-8.8p1-7.fc37 there is also a requirement on the length of
the rsa keys.

Tru to add:

   RequiredRSASize   1024

this didn't make an effekt;

Or redo your rsa key with a biger size.


the key used with WinSCP already 2048-bit

and now the confusing thing

a regenerated a rsa key with bigger size

in case someone has such setup:  a Win10 and a Fedora 38 can try this ...

adding this

ssh-rsa 
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 
Test-Key


to /home/youruser/.ssh/authorized_keys

and this private key

-BEGIN OPENSSH PRIVATE KEY-
b3BlbnNzaC1rZXktdjEABG5vbmUEbm9uZQABAAABlwdzc2gtcn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-END OPENSSH PRIVATE KEY-

ssh -i id_rsa  youruser@fedorahost

doesn't work

this is quite strange; because the same keyfiles works from another 
Linux [not Fedora]


what's causing this strange behaviour?

Walter




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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

Who is the problem kid: Win10 or Fedora?

[Walter H. via users]

Hello,

I've got a Win10 box und a Fedora  VM

both are latest updates / release [Win10 22H2 19045.3086 and Fedora 38]

I was used to connect to the Fedora VM from the Win10 box

- with the OpenSSH commands, that are nativly available in Windows
- with WinSCP
- or the ssh commands inside the WSL [Debian Distribution]

some time ago I noticed that the used keys from the WSL don't work any more;

I added this inside the Fedora in the sshd_config

HostKeyAlgorithms +ssh-rsa

PubkeyAcceptedKeyTypes ssh-rsa

then the login using the keys from WSL were working again;

but why didn't this help to login using the keys via the Win 10 OpenSSH 
commands;


there I had to create new keys

ssh-keygen -t ed25519

and then to modify the above addings like this:

HostKeyAlgorithms +ssh-rsa,ssh-ed25519

PubkeyAcceptedKeyTypes ssh-rsa,ssh-ed25519

the same with WinSCP, there I had to gernerate a new key, too;

the used ssh-rsa keys are refused, even from WSL they work;

a bit confusing/strange;

Walter




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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: broken link /etc/extlinux.conf in syslinux-extlinux because /boot/extlinux/extlinux.conf is missing

[Walter H. via users]

On 24.08.2022 16:19, stan via users wrote:

On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 09:05:21 +0200
"Walter H. via users"  wrote:


Just the unorthodox question, may I simple remove the link (rm -f
/etc/extlinux.conf)?

I noticed this, when I did the following in folder /etc

grep PATTERN /etc/* -r

Yes.  But whenever syslinux-extlinux is updated, it will recreate the
broken link.  I think that only happens after mass rebuilds, so
probably only after upgrades to a new version of fedora.


ok, I did

dnf remove syslinux-extlinux

and after a reboot everything was fine, the link was removed - no need 
of this package ;-)





smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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: broken link /etc/extlinux.conf in syslinux-extlinux because /boot/extlinux/extlinux.conf is missing

[Walter H. via users]

On 23.08.2022 20:59, stan via users wrote:

On Tue, 23 Aug 2022 19:45:24 +0200
"Walter H. via users"  wrote:


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1016304  <-- still
relevant for fc36(!)

Why?

I think the answer is that no one has done the work.  It has been a
long time since I had anything to do with syslinux.  From reading at
this link,
https://wiki.syslinux.org/wiki/index.php?title=Config
it was contemporary with lilo as the main bootloader, but for booting
install media (including floppies, where I recall it from). I thought it
might be obsolete because of its age, but it turns out that there are
several packages that are dependent on it (I used dnf to try to remove
it, and there they were).

After perusing the link above a little, I think that any default
extlinux.conf file in /boot/extlinux/ would be incorrect, as it needs
the location of the kernel and the kernel options added [1], and they
need to be relative to the file system on the media. Anyway, at the
link above there is a sample extlinux.conf that you could try, after
putting in the kernel you actually want to boot, and the kernel options
you want to use.  If it works, you could then update the ticket with
that information, and the extlinux.conf file that worked, so that it
could be added to the package if there is a kind soul willing to do the
work. Or, since they will likely be more knowledgeable than I am, they
might be able to explain why it wouldn't work.


Just the unorthodox question, may I simple remove the link (rm -f 
/etc/extlinux.conf)?


I noticed this, when I did the following in folder /etc

grep PATTERN /etc/* -r

Thanks,

Walter





smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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

broken link /etc/extlinux.conf in syslinux-extlinux because /boot/extlinux/extlinux.conf is missing

[Walter H. via users]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1016304  <-- still relevant 
for fc36(!)


Why?

Thanks,

Walter




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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: accessing a fedora box (latest fedora 35) from Windows using PuTTY/WinSCP only possible with userid/password

[Walter H. via users]

On 20.11.2021 16:13, Markus Schönhaber wrote:

20.11.21, 15:24 +0100, Walter H. via users:


Nov 20 15:11:33 lxfedora sshd[2584]: userauth_pubkey: key type ssh-rsa
not in PubkeyAcceptedAlgorithms [preauth]

so the question is:  what is the default value of this
'PubkeyAcceptedAlgorithms', in order to set it to the default PLUS
'ssh-rsa';


I think (not tested) adding

PubkeyAcceptedAlgorithms +ssh-rsa

to sshd_config might resolve your problem.

yes, this solved the problem;
thanks;


AFAIUI the root source of the problem might be that your key uses a 
SHA-signature with a SHA-1 hash. Therefore, a better solution might be 
to generate a new key.



that is right; the latest PuTTY is 0.76 and the latest WinSCP is 5.19.4;

I did this generated a new key with a SHA2 hash,
with PuTTY this worked, but not with WInSCP;

Walter




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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 on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: accessing a fedora box (latest fedora 35) from Windows using PuTTY/WinSCP only possible with userid/password

[Walter H. via users]

On 20.11.2021 14:27, George N. White III wrote:
On Sat, 20 Nov 2021 at 08:16, Walter H. via users 
mailto:users@lists.fedoraproject.org>> 
wrote:


Hello,

can someone please give me a hint, where to look for the following
problem ...

I have several Linux VMs (all except this one are CentOS), and I took
/root/.ssh/authorized_keys from one of them
and copied it onto this Fedora box;

accessing from my Jump-VM also directly using SSH from Win10 works
fine
using the private key,
but from when using PuTTY/WinSCP I get: "Server refused our key."
(all other Linux-VMs use the same authorized_keys and can be accessed
using PuTTY/WinSCP with this private key)

is there something I must change on the side of the Fedora box or
something I have to change in PuTTY/WinSCP?
(I'm using the latest releases of PuTTY/WinSCP)


Many enterprise policies prohibit ssh access for root, but if you aren't
worried about security risks, look in /etc/sshsshd_conf's Authentication
section for "PermitRootLogin":


PermitRootLogin is set to yes;

and the same Problem also exists with non root, too;

/var/log/secure shows this:

Nov 20 15:11:33 lxfedora sshd[2584]: userauth_pubkey: key type ssh-rsa 
not in PubkeyAcceptedAlgorithms [preauth]


so the question is:  what is the default value of this 
'PubkeyAcceptedAlgorithms', in order to set it to the default PLUS 
'ssh-rsa';


Thanks,
Walter



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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 on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

accessing a fedora box (latest fedora 35) from Windows using PuTTY/WinSCP only possible with userid/password

[Walter H. via users]

Hello,

can someone please give me a hint, where to look for the following 
problem ...


I have several Linux VMs (all except this one are CentOS), and I took 
/root/.ssh/authorized_keys from one of them

and copied it onto this Fedora box;

accessing from my Jump-VM also directly using SSH from Win10 works fine 
using the private key,

but from when using PuTTY/WinSCP I get: "Server refused our key."
(all other Linux-VMs use the same authorized_keys and can be accessed 
using PuTTY/WinSCP with this private key)


is there something I must change on the side of the Fedora box or 
something I have to change in PuTTY/WinSCP?

(I'm using the latest releases of PuTTY/WinSCP)

Thanks,
Walter




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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 on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Windows 11 VMs

[Walter H. via users]

On 03.07.2021 23:17, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:

On Sat, 2021-07-03 at 13:54 -0700, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

On 7/2/21 9:02 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:

Since Microsoft is going to require a TPM module for their new
system,
are there implications for KVM, VirtualBox and VMware, or has this
already been dealt with?

poc


Hi Poc,

Fedora 34
qemu-kvm-5.2.0-8.fc34.x86_64

I have Windows 11 Version Dev (OS Build 22000.1) running
under qemu-kvm.   I installed it from ISO on a blank VM.

may I ask where you got this ISO from?



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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 on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Windows 11 VMs

[Walter H. via users]

On 03.07.2021 08:02, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 2021-07-02 4:03 p.m., Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 2021-07-02 9:02 a.m., Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:

Since Microsoft is going to require a TPM module for their new system,
are there implications for KVM, VirtualBox and VMware, or has this
already been dealt with?


qemu has support for a TPM 2.0 either as a passthrough or an 
emulation.   I haven't tested it yet, but I assume it works.


I tested it and Windows 10 let me enable bitlocker, so it definitely 
accepts it. 



Are you sure, because enabling bitlocker is also possible without a TPM 
in Win10;





smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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 on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Windows 11 VMs

[Walter H. via users]

I have successfully installed Win 11 build 21996.1 as a VMware Guest;
(used the ISO that was leaked several days ago)

On 02.07.2021 18:02, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:

Since Microsoft is going to require a TPM module for their new system,
are there implications for KVM, VirtualBox and VMware, or has this
already been dealt with?




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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 on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure