Re: [Freedombox-discuss] apt

[Dietmar]

Thanks, that was successful.
However, I had to restart the box to have unattended-upgrades run again.
Dis- and en-abling was not sufficient.

Dietmar

Am Donnerstag, den 22.09.2016, 17:34 -0400 schrieb James Valleroy:

> On 09/22/2016 02:26 PM, Dietmar wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I realized, my last unattended upgrade was on 8-Sept. So I went via
> > ssh into the box and tried aptitude which recommended me to do a "sudo
> > dpkg --configure -a", which brought up an error:
> >
> >> $ sudo dpkg --configure -a
> >> libapt-inst2.0:armhf (1.3~rc4) wird eingerichtet ...
> >> Trigger für libc-bin (2.23-5) werden verarbeitet ...
> >> dpkg: Fehler beim Bearbeiten des Paketes apt (--configure):
> >>  Paket ist in einem sehr schlechten inkonsistenten Zustand - Sie sollten es
> >>  nochmal installieren, bevor Sie die Konfiguration versuchen.
> >> Fehler traten auf beim Bearbeiten von:
> >>  apt
> > "apt is in a very bad shape, you should reinstall it bevor trying to
> > configure"
> > So I did an "apt update", which ran through, checked that there were a
> > couple of packages to upgrade, including apt from 1.3~rc2 to 1.3~rc4.
> > The "apt upgrade" produced again some errors:
> >> $ sudo apt upgrade
> >> Paketlisten werden gelesen... Fertig
> >> Abhängigkeitsbaum wird aufgebaut.   
> >> Statusinformationen werden eingelesen Fertig
> >> Probieren Sie »apt-get -f install«, um dies zu korrigieren.
> >> Die folgenden Pakete haben unerfüllte Abhängigkeiten:
> >> E: Unerfüllte Abhängigkeiten. Versuchen Sie, -f zu benutzen.
> > meaning "unfullfilled dependencies, try "-f". 
> > Before breaking my packages, is it save to use "force"?
> > Also, what might have caused this, just a bug in "apt"?
> >
> > I am running on testing.
> >
> 
> I think it's this issue mentioned in the changelog for apt:
> 
> * re-add apt breaks/replaces apt-utils (<< 1.3~exp2~) (Closes: #836220 
> )
> 
> I would try "apt-get -f install", and you may also need to do "apt-get
> install --reinstall apt".
> 
> ___
> Freedombox-discuss mailing list
> Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] apt

[Daniel Gnoutcheff]

I haven't much help to offer about possible APT database trouble, except:

On 09/22/2016 02:26 PM, Dietmar wrote:
> meaning "unfullfilled dependencies, try "-f". 
> Before breaking my packages, is it save to use "force"?

In apt-get, "-f" is short for "--fix-broken".

HTH,
Daniel



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] apt

[James Valleroy]

On 09/22/2016 02:26 PM, Dietmar wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I realized, my last unattended upgrade was on 8-Sept. So I went via
> ssh into the box and tried aptitude which recommended me to do a "sudo
> dpkg --configure -a", which brought up an error:
>
>> $ sudo dpkg --configure -a
>> libapt-inst2.0:armhf (1.3~rc4) wird eingerichtet ...
>> Trigger für libc-bin (2.23-5) werden verarbeitet ...
>> dpkg: Fehler beim Bearbeiten des Paketes apt (--configure):
>>  Paket ist in einem sehr schlechten inkonsistenten Zustand - Sie sollten es
>>  nochmal installieren, bevor Sie die Konfiguration versuchen.
>> Fehler traten auf beim Bearbeiten von:
>>  apt
> "apt is in a very bad shape, you should reinstall it bevor trying to
> configure"
> So I did an "apt update", which ran through, checked that there were a
> couple of packages to upgrade, including apt from 1.3~rc2 to 1.3~rc4.
> The "apt upgrade" produced again some errors:
>> $ sudo apt upgrade
>> Paketlisten werden gelesen... Fertig
>> Abhängigkeitsbaum wird aufgebaut.   
>> Statusinformationen werden eingelesen Fertig
>> Probieren Sie »apt-get -f install«, um dies zu korrigieren.
>> Die folgenden Pakete haben unerfüllte Abhängigkeiten:
>> E: Unerfüllte Abhängigkeiten. Versuchen Sie, -f zu benutzen.
> meaning "unfullfilled dependencies, try "-f". 
> Before breaking my packages, is it save to use "force"?
> Also, what might have caused this, just a bug in "apt"?
>
> I am running on testing.
>

I think it's this issue mentioned in the changelog for apt:

* re-add apt breaks/replaces apt-utils (<< 1.3~exp2~) (Closes: #836220 
)

I would try "apt-get -f install", and you may also need to do "apt-get
install --reinstall apt".



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] Apt anomaly when going through privoxy.

[Sunil Mohan Adapa]

On 06/29/2016 09:06 PM, Daniel Gnoutcheff wrote:
> On 06/28/2016 08:59 PM, A. F. Cano wrote:
>> I have noticed that if privoxy is enabled, when doing an apt download from
>> internal machines, if it fails, aptitude retries but starts at the
>> beginning again.
> 
> My Google-fu suggests that Privoxy filters out the "Range" HTTP request
> header field by default [1], which would cause this behavior.  There do
> appear to be plans to change this [2], though I'm not sure what the
> status of that is.
> 
[...]
> 
> [1]
> http://sources.debian.net/src/privoxy/3.0.21-7%2Bdeb8u1/default.filter/#L779
> [2] https://sourceforge.net/p/ijbswa/bugs/893/#6b17

This problems seems to be fixed now in verison >= 3.0.25 which is
available in testing and unstable.  The fix is to disable filtering of
range header by default.

-- 
Sunil




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] Apt anomaly when going through privoxy.

[Daniel Gnoutcheff]

On 07/02/2016 09:42 PM, A. F. Cano wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 11:36:22AM -0400, Daniel Gnoutcheff wrote:
>> On 06/28/2016 08:59 PM, A. F. Cano wrote:
>>> I have noticed that if privoxy is enabled, when doing an apt download from
>>> internal machines, if it fails, aptitude retries but starts at the
>>> beginning again.
>>
>> My Google-fu suggests that Privoxy filters out the "Range" HTTP request
> 
> I wouldn't have known to look for a Range HTTP request...

Yep, I figured it was the hint we needed. ;)  I just happen to know
about range requests from messing with wget's --continue option.

Of course, the best hint would be from someone who uses privoxy and who
has devised a workaround for this.  (Not me. :P)  If privoxy has a
mailing list (it probably does), someone there might know.

Have a good one,
Daniel



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] Apt anomaly when going through privoxy.

[A. F. Cano]

On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 11:36:22AM -0400, Daniel Gnoutcheff wrote:
> On 06/28/2016 08:59 PM, A. F. Cano wrote:
> > I have noticed that if privoxy is enabled, when doing an apt download from
> > internal machines, if it fails, aptitude retries but starts at the
> > beginning again.
> 
> My Google-fu suggests that Privoxy filters out the "Range" HTTP request

I wouldn't have known to look for a Range HTTP request...

> header field by default [1], which would cause this behavior.  There do
> appear to be plans to change this [2], though I'm not sure what the
> status of that is.
> 
> It may be possible to configure privoxy to stop filtering out range
> requests; I'll leave that as an exercise for someone who uses it.
> Possibly useful docs: [3]
> 
> [1]
> http://sources.debian.net/src/privoxy/3.0.21-7%2Bdeb8u1/default.filter/#L779
> [2] https://sourceforge.net/p/ijbswa/bugs/893/#6b17
> [3]
> https://www.privoxy.org/user-manual/actions-file.html#CLIENT-HEADER-TAGGER
> 
> HTH!

Very complete and enlightening answer.  Thank you very much!

Augustine


___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] Apt anomaly when going through privoxy.

[Daniel Gnoutcheff]

On 06/28/2016 08:59 PM, A. F. Cano wrote:
> I have noticed that if privoxy is enabled, when doing an apt download from
> internal machines, if it fails, aptitude retries but starts at the
> beginning again.

My Google-fu suggests that Privoxy filters out the "Range" HTTP request
header field by default [1], which would cause this behavior.  There do
appear to be plans to change this [2], though I'm not sure what the
status of that is.

It may be possible to configure privoxy to stop filtering out range
requests; I'll leave that as an exercise for someone who uses it.
Possibly useful docs: [3]

[1]
http://sources.debian.net/src/privoxy/3.0.21-7%2Bdeb8u1/default.filter/#L779
[2] https://sourceforge.net/p/ijbswa/bugs/893/#6b17
[3]
https://www.privoxy.org/user-manual/actions-file.html#CLIENT-HEADER-TAGGER

HTH!



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] apt upgrade creates eth0 network interface

[Dietmar]

Am Donnerstag, den 12.05.2016, 18:28 -0400 schrieb James Valleroy:

> On 05/12/2016 03:07 PM, Dietmar wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I did yesterday an 'apt upgrade' (my impression is that
> > unattended-upgrades are not working, but no proof yet, no error
> > messages in the log).
> > The result was that I had a new network interface 'eth0' again, which
> > was activated, additionally to the 'FreedomBox WAN'.
> > I had to remove (via Plinth) eth0 to have access from the outside to
> > the box again.
> > It's the 2nd or 3rd time I am observing this. So my impression is that
> > some configuration is getting overwritten during the upgrade process.
> > Has anyone else observed this?
> >
> 
> Just out of curiosity, were there any dpkg prompts during the apt upgrade?

No, now dpkg prompts, but 2 packages are kept back because the new
versions in sid conflict with my owncloud.

> 
> > Also, I observed that my domain name was not listed any more in the
> > name-services. I had to enter it again to find it activated. The same
> > root cause?
> >
> 
> This sounds related to https://github.com/freedombox/Plinth/issues/262.
> When Plinth is restarted, the config module will add the current
> domainname to the Name Services page. But if the domain name is blank in
> Configuration (due to issue 262), then it won't be added.
> 
> A quick workaround for this issue is to change the hostname to anything
> other than the default value ("freedombox"). Then set the domain name
> again on the Configuration page.

Thanks
   Dietmar

> 
> --
> James
> 
> ___
> Freedombox-discuss mailing list
> Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] apt upgrade creates eth0 network interface

[James Valleroy]

On 05/12/2016 03:07 PM, Dietmar wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I did yesterday an 'apt upgrade' (my impression is that
> unattended-upgrades are not working, but no proof yet, no error
> messages in the log).
> The result was that I had a new network interface 'eth0' again, which
> was activated, additionally to the 'FreedomBox WAN'.
> I had to remove (via Plinth) eth0 to have access from the outside to
> the box again.
> It's the 2nd or 3rd time I am observing this. So my impression is that
> some configuration is getting overwritten during the upgrade process.
> Has anyone else observed this?
>

Just out of curiosity, were there any dpkg prompts during the apt upgrade?

> Also, I observed that my domain name was not listed any more in the
> name-services. I had to enter it again to find it activated. The same
> root cause?
>

This sounds related to https://github.com/freedombox/Plinth/issues/262.
When Plinth is restarted, the config module will add the current
domainname to the Name Services page. But if the domain name is blank in
Configuration (due to issue 262), then it won't be added.

A quick workaround for this issue is to change the hostname to anything
other than the default value ("freedombox"). Then set the domain name
again on the Configuration page.

--
James



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] Apt mirror from Debian as a Tor hidden service

[Sunil Mohan]

On 08/26/2015 03:51 PM, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Petter Reinholdtsen]
>> I send the blog author a proposal to create a new apt transport method
>> in /usr/lib/apt/methods/ to make it easier to ensure transport via Tor,
>> but I have not tested it myself.
> 
> Today a new blog post showed up,
>  http://richardhartmann.de/blog/posts/2015/08/25-Tor-enabled_Debian_mirror_part_2/
>  >
> and it explained that the transport idea already was implemented in
> https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/apt-transport-tor > last year.
> 
> I suspect apt via tor should be enabled by default on Freedombox.
> 

James Valleroy implemented a patch for turning on APT via Tor when Tor
is installed.  It is disabled when Tor is disabled.  This patch got
merged into Plinth today.

-- 
Sunil



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] Apt mirror from Debian as a Tor hidden service

[Petter Reinholdtsen]

[Petter Reinholdtsen]
> I send the blog author a proposal to create a new apt transport method
> in /usr/lib/apt/methods/ to make it easier to ensure transport via Tor,
> but I have not tested it myself.

Today a new blog post showed up,
http://richardhartmann.de/blog/posts/2015/08/25-Tor-enabled_Debian_mirror_part_2/
 >
and it explained that the transport idea already was implemented in
https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/apt-transport-tor > last year.

I suspect apt via tor should be enabled by default on Freedombox.

-- 
Happy hacking
Petter Reinholdtsen

___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] apt-get install fbx

[Jonas Smedegaard]

Quoting bnewb...@robocracy.org (2012-12-04 21:17:31)
> On the subject of restructuring freedom-maker, what about using Debian 
> Live instead? "Normal" (non-live) images can be generated, and it's a 
> more general purpose (and supported) debian tool.
> 
> I have a working-but-not-documented wheezy image for the DreamPlug 
> generated using Debian Live if there is interest, but will be AFK for 
> the next week.

Sounds quite interesting!

Please do add the *sources* of your approach - i.e. some reference to 
(the non-default parts of) the debian-live config files you composed - 
to http://wiki.debian.org/FreedomBox/Tools

Some might also appreciate some reference to the actual image you 
produced, but when easy to reproduce that is less needed, I guess.


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private


signature.asc
Description: signature
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] apt-get install fbx

[Bdale Garbee]

bnewb...@robocracy.org writes:

> I have a working-but-not-documented wheezy image for the DreamPlug 
> generated using Debian Live if there is interest, but will be AFK for the 
> next week.

Feel free to pass me the details when you return.  My impression the
last time I looked was that the Live build system was way heavier than
what I wanted, but as we've added things that may be less true now.

However, I will say that now that Debian Installer just works on the
Dreamplug, I'm far less interested in installation tools and far more
interested in package structuring to make it possible for anything that
can run Debian to be easily and effectively configured to be a
FreedomBox.  That's what I wanted to work on originally, if the various
commitments made around the DreamPlug hadn't gotten in the way...

Bdale


pgpROV0AQ4Glj.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] apt-get install fbx

[bnewbold]

On Sun, 2 Dec 2012, Bdale Garbee wrote:


JOSEFSSON Erik  writes:


Just a very general question: What does it take (in detailed steps) to
get from where fbx is today to apt-get install fbx?


I'm working on it.  The short answer is creating a suitable metapackage
or three and then restructuring freedom-maker to use it/them.

Bdale


On the subject of restructuring freedom-maker, what about using Debian 
Live instead? "Normal" (non-live) images can be generated, and it's a more 
general purpose (and supported) debian tool.


I have a working-but-not-documented wheezy image for the DreamPlug 
generated using Debian Live if there is interest, but will be AFK for the 
next week.


--bryan

___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] apt-get install fbx

[Bdale Garbee]

JOSEFSSON Erik  writes:

> Just a very general question: What does it take (in detailed steps) to
> get from where fbx is today to apt-get install fbx? 

I'm working on it.  The short answer is creating a suitable metapackage
or three and then restructuring freedom-maker to use it/them.

Bdale


pgplIyoAhZwfB.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] apt-get install fbx

[Jonas Smedegaard]

Quoting Jonathan Wilkes (2012-11-20 21:13:12)
> It's nice to see a plan of basic infrastructure work and example 
> scripts up to 0.4.0, but that's a mysterious and large jump to 1.0.0 
> when you project FBX will be "usable by non-technical users".
> 
> Regardless of time frame, I predict when something like 0.4.0 is 
> reached Zeno's paradox will appear to happen: FBX will then be almost 
> halfway to the goal of "usable by non-technical users", but with 
> another mysterious jump between version 1 and the closest version 
> number not exceeding it.

Sorry, but I totally fail to understand what you are trying to say with 
the above.

Did you perhaps "reveal" that I am not a UX designer and therefore have 
no clue which intermediary granulary steps that part might consist of?

If so, you are perfectly correct, and I apologize for not having shouted 
out that fact loud enough.


 - Jonas

P.S. Please also avoid top-posting.


signature.asc
Description: signature
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] apt-get install fbx

[Jonathan Wilkes]

It's nice to see a plan of basic infrastructure work
and example scripts up to 0.4.0, but that's a mysterious and large jump
to 1.0.0 when you project FBX will be "usable by non-technical users".

Regardless of time frame, I predict when something like 0.4.0 is reached
Zeno's paradox will appear to happen: FBX will then be almost halfway
to the goal of "usable by non-technical users", but with another
mysterious jump between version 1 and the closest version number
not exceeding it.


-Jonathan


- Original Message -
> From: Jonas Smedegaard 
> To: freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
> Cc: 
> Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 1:27 PM
> Subject: Re: [Freedombox-discuss] apt-get install fbx
> 
> Quoting JOSEFSSON Erik (2012-11-14 18:55:19)
>>  Just a very general question: What does it take (in detailed steps) to 
>>  get from where fbx is today to apt-get install fbx?
> 
> FreedomBox (arguably) exist today in version 0.1 (and some additional 
> progress beyond that), but not in a long-term maintainable form which 
> (arguably) means it must be fully and officially part of Debian.
> 
> A crude answer to your question: It takes a single (rather large) step 
> of someone converting freedom-maker into a Debian package.
> 
> Here's a transcript from my crystal ball (listed like Changelog of an 
> actual package, timestamps and author deliberately left out):
> 
> 
> freedombox 1.0.0
> 
>   * First user-friendly release: "Boring Box".
>     + Provides Jabber service.
>     + Provides privacy-oriented web proxy service.
>     + Usable by non-technical users.
>     + Works on DHCP-administered and IPv4ALL networks
>       (without voodoo: does *not* penetrate firewalls).
> 
> freedombox 0.4.0
> 
>   * Depend on recent privoxy. Enable paranoid setting by
>     default. Thanks to James Vasile for his work on getting
>     his forked package merged upstream to official Debian
>     package.
>   * Fix adapt and reload ejabberd when network changes
>     (e.g. switching between IPv4ALL and DHCP-provided ip).
> 
> freedombox 0.3.3
> 
>   * More bugfixes to idempotency of postinst script.
> 
> freedombox 0.3.2
> 
>   * Fix install routines when reinstalling package while
>     config files exist (e.g. from older non-purged install).
> 
> freedombox 0.3.1
> 
>   * Setup Jabber service during install, Thanks to ejabberd
>     and avahi package maintainers for improving flexibility
>     of (re)configuring those package automatically.
>   * Simplify jabber example script to only setup web client.
> 
> freedombox 0.3.0
> 
>   * Depend on avahi-autoipd, ejabberd, apache2 and jwchat.
>   * Add example script to setup Jabber service reachable
>     over Multicast DNS, both from native XMPP clients and
>     included web client.
> 
> freedombox 0.2.1
> 
>   * Bugfix release for included example scripts.
> 
> freedombox 0.2.0
> 
>   * Initial official packaging release.
>   * Uses Semantic Versioning (see <http://semver.org/>)
>     (minor version 1 skipped to avoid confusion with prior
>     Foundation non-package release).
>   * Virtually empty package: intended to depend on needed code
>     projects, but these first need to be packaged themselves.
>   * Includes example scripts for the local user to manually
>     download and compile those code projects not yet packaged.
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully there will be even more releases before 1.0.0 to include more 
> of the work currently shipped by Nick Daly's non-package snapshots.
> 
> Then after the 1.0.0 release there will probably be parallel work on 
> both bugfix 1.0.x releases and feature-extending 1.x.y releases, 
> eventually stabilizing, and in a(n even brighter) future the 2.0.0 
> release which might offer the first non-boring stuff...
> 
> 
> - Jonas
> 
> ___
> Freedombox-discuss mailing list
> Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
> 

___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] apt-get install fbx

[Jonas Smedegaard]

Quoting JOSEFSSON Erik (2012-11-14 18:55:19)
> Just a very general question: What does it take (in detailed steps) to 
> get from where fbx is today to apt-get install fbx?

FreedomBox (arguably) exist today in version 0.1 (and some additional 
progress beyond that), but not in a long-term maintainable form which 
(arguably) means it must be fully and officially part of Debian.

A crude answer to your question: It takes a single (rather large) step 
of someone converting freedom-maker into a Debian package.

Here's a transcript from my crystal ball (listed like Changelog of an 
actual package, timestamps and author deliberately left out):


freedombox 1.0.0

  * First user-friendly release: "Boring Box".
+ Provides Jabber service.
+ Provides privacy-oriented web proxy service.
+ Usable by non-technical users.
+ Works on DHCP-administered and IPv4ALL networks
  (without voodoo: does *not* penetrate firewalls).

freedombox 0.4.0

  * Depend on recent privoxy. Enable paranoid setting by
default. Thanks to James Vasile for his work on getting
his forked package merged upstream to official Debian
package.
  * Fix adapt and reload ejabberd when network changes
(e.g. switching between IPv4ALL and DHCP-provided ip).

freedombox 0.3.3

  * More bugfixes to idempotency of postinst script.

freedombox 0.3.2

  * Fix install routines when reinstalling package while
config files exist (e.g. from older non-purged install).

freedombox 0.3.1

  * Setup Jabber service during install, Thanks to ejabberd
and avahi package maintainers for improving flexibility
of (re)configuring those package automatically.
  * Simplify jabber example script to only setup web client.

freedombox 0.3.0

  * Depend on avahi-autoipd, ejabberd, apache2 and jwchat.
  * Add example script to setup Jabber service reachable
over Multicast DNS, both from native XMPP clients and
included web client.

freedombox 0.2.1

  * Bugfix release for included example scripts.

freedombox 0.2.0

  * Initial official packaging release.
  * Uses Semantic Versioning (see )
(minor version 1 skipped to avoid confusion with prior
Foundation non-package release).
  * Virtually empty package: intended to depend on needed code
projects, but these first need to be packaged themselves.
  * Includes example scripts for the local user to manually
download and compile those code projects not yet packaged.



Hopefully there will be even more releases before 1.0.0 to include more 
of the work currently shipped by Nick Daly's non-package snapshots.

Then after the 1.0.0 release there will probably be parallel work on 
both bugfix 1.0.x releases and feature-extending 1.x.y releases, 
eventually stabilizing, and in a(n even brighter) future the 2.0.0 
release which might offer the first non-boring stuff...


 - Jonas


signature.asc
Description: signature
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] apt-get updating the kernel

[Ian Sullivan]

On 06/28/2012 05:07 PM, monkeyiq wrote:
> Probably starting with the uboot upgrade and
> then trying a few kernel updates on the non live plug system.

Once upgrading uboot to boot from ext file systems it is possible to
just format the microsd card as a single ext partition and boot from
that. I have had no trouble upgrading such systems.

-Ian

___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] apt-get updating the kernel

[monkeyiq]

On Thu, 2012-06-28 at 11:35 -0400, Ian Sullivan wrote:
> On 06/27/2012 10:22 PM, Nick M. Daly wrote:
> > If you're using the uBoot that came with the DreamPlug, kernel upgrades
> > or boot process changes will probably give you trouble.  If you're using
> > the upgraded uBoot [0], everything should be fine.  Ian might recall
> > details I've forgotten, though.
> 
> The default uboot causes trouble because it cannot boot directly from an
> ext formatted partition. As a workaround Globalscale formatted all the
> cards with a small fat partition at the beginning of the disk and put
> the kernel image there for the bootloader. Unfortunately, apt does not
> know to update the kernel image over on that separate partition. I think
> this can be resolved by manually copying over the kernel and initrd
> images to the fat partition once apt is done upgrading them where they
> live on the ext partition but I have not done it myself. The big danger
> is that your newly upgraded system will depend on functionality missing
> from the older kernel that uboot grabs off of the fat partition and then
> you will get stuck with an unbootable system.
> 
> -Ian

After a bit of digging I notice that although the system itself is
installed on /dev/sdb2 the /boot is a VFAT which is actually /dev/sda1.
Among some non interesting files, uImage is listed in /boot, I can't see
any initrd image on /dev/sda1.

I also wonder if the initrd is copied to /dev/sda1 if the kernel would
find it there during boot or become wedged somehow and not
mount /dev/sdb2 and go on from there.

I'm thinking it may be best to get another plug and the JTAG unit before
tinkering with this bit. Probably starting with the uboot upgrade and
then trying a few kernel updates on the non live plug system.

Thanks for the info guys!



___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] apt-get updating the kernel

[Ian Sullivan]

On 06/27/2012 10:22 PM, Nick M. Daly wrote:
> If you're using the uBoot that came with the DreamPlug, kernel upgrades
> or boot process changes will probably give you trouble.  If you're using
> the upgraded uBoot [0], everything should be fine.  Ian might recall
> details I've forgotten, though.

The default uboot causes trouble because it cannot boot directly from an
ext formatted partition. As a workaround Globalscale formatted all the
cards with a small fat partition at the beginning of the disk and put
the kernel image there for the bootloader. Unfortunately, apt does not
know to update the kernel image over on that separate partition. I think
this can be resolved by manually copying over the kernel and initrd
images to the fat partition once apt is done upgrading them where they
live on the ext partition but I have not done it myself. The big danger
is that your newly upgraded system will depend on functionality missing
from the older kernel that uboot grabs off of the fat partition and then
you will get stuck with an unbootable system.

-Ian

___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] apt-get updating the kernel

[Nick M. Daly]

On Thu, 28 Jun 2012 10:40:44 +1000, monkeyiq wrote:
>   Sorry about the FAQ, but if one has installed FreedomBox on an sdcard
> in a Dreamplug is there any special procedure needed to update the
> kernel or does the normal apt-get update command take care of all of
> that sort of thing for you?

If you're using the uBoot that came with the DreamPlug, kernel upgrades
or boot process changes will probably give you trouble.  If you're using
the upgraded uBoot [0], everything should be fine.  Ian might recall
details I've forgotten, though.

I've actually shared the same uInitrd between images before, it had no
trouble booting.  That's the uInitrd that's in the unstable FreedomBox
image [1], actually.

Nick

0:
http://freedomboxfoundation.org/ubootUpgradeInstructions/index.en.html

1: https://www.betweennowhere.net/tracker/freedombox-unstable.torrent


pgptR6TxAfYSR.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] apt-get updating the kernel

[Brian Drake]

Honestly - I found that apt-get upgrade on my dreamplug has more than once
bricked it.  Annoying to say the least.  BUT - I wasn't using the freedom
box image at that point.  I tend to avoid updating anything now unless
specifically called for by an update/ config requirement.  And then I do it
with trepidation.

In other words - I'd be interested in the answer :)

Brian Drake
Austin Texas
512.850-6326
http://www.linkedin.com/in/brndrakeecoit
Schedule a Meeting:  http://tungle.me/briandrake



On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 7:40 PM, monkeyiq  wrote:

> Hi,
>   Sorry about the FAQ, but if one has installed FreedomBox on an sdcard
> in a Dreamplug is there any special procedure needed to update the
> kernel or does the normal apt-get update command take care of all of
> that sort of thing for you?
>
>   Hopefully this can also be of interest to others.
>
>
>
> ___
> Freedombox-discuss mailing list
> Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
>
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] apt-get update and an SD card

[Nick M. Daly]

On Thu, 17 May 2012 19:52:32 +0100, Nicholas Hardiman wrote:
> When I run apt-get upgrade, the top command tells me wa (time spent
> waiting for SD card IO) can sit at 95%. SD cards seem to have
> appalling write speeds.

Yup.

> Are you using any trick to make big write jobs less awful?

Some cards come with a write cache that works to make writing suck less.
I had one SD card that had a 256 MB cache, though when that was full,
data crawled along at 1-2MB/s.  It also seemed to take forever to
actually commit the cache to disk, telling the OS it had finished
copying the files long before the card could be unmounted.  When copying
the FreedomMaker image to my card, I corrupted a file system or two
before I realized that, no, umount wasn't wrong, it was just taking a
while to finish.

I don't know whether microSD cards can even have such a write cache.

> no swap, more tmpfs, perhaps a different file system altogether?
>
> (good notes on flash file systems at
> http://superuser.com/questions/248078/choice-of-filesystem-for-gnu-linux-on-an-sd-card)

That seems worth investigating, but no, I know no tricks.

> And what about apps? Do you use the memory engine with mysql?
> Something clever with /var?

I haven't done much investigation into the area, but I'd also suggest a
ramdisk for data that can be tossed between rewrites, or a RAM-based
faux write-cache.  I saw something interesting on that, somewhere on the
intertubes, a while ago.

Nick


pgpgCqAPiSvJz.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss