Here is the sbuild build log
** Attachment added: "apparmor_2.13.2-9ubuntu1_amd64-2019-03-13T21:48:49Z.build"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apparmor/+bug/1817799/+attachment/5245940/+files/apparmor_2.13.2-9ubuntu1_amd64-2019-03-13T21%3A48%3A49Z.build
--
You received this bug noti
Here is the upgrade log. Note that these parser errors are unrelated to
apparmor 2.13 and an issue with the snapd packaging:
AppArmor parser error for /etc/apparmor.d in
/etc/apparmor.d/usr.lib.snapd.snap-confine.real at line 11: Could not open
'/var/lib/snapd/apparmor/snap-confine'
AppArmor par
** Attachment added: "upgrade.log"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apparmor/+bug/1817799/+attachment/5245939/+files/upgrade.log
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apparmor in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.lau
** Description changed:
FFe paperwork still in progress
Feature Freeze exception for AppArmor 2.13.2
The security team is pushing to get AppArmor 2.13 into 19.04 since we
want AppArmor 3 (or higher) in 20.04 and we'd like to incrementally
update to it to test the new features that
** Description changed:
FFe paperwork still in progress
Feature Freeze exception for AppArmor 2.13.2
The security team is pushing to get AppArmor 2.13 into 19.04 since we
want AppArmor 3 (or higher) in 20.04 and we'd like to incrementally
update to it to test the new features that
** Description changed:
FFe paperwork still in progress
Feature Freeze exception for AppArmor 2.13.2
The security team is pushing to get AppArmor 2.13 into 19.04 since we
want AppArmor 3 (or higher) in 20.04 and we'd like to incrementally
update to it to test the new features that
Adding an Ubuntu 19.04 task in anticipation of the 2.13.2 upload.
** Also affects: apparmor (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apparmor in Ubuntu.
https://bugs
** Description changed:
- FFe paperwork still in progress
-
Feature Freeze exception for AppArmor 2.13.2
The security team is pushing to get AppArmor 2.13 into 19.04 since we
want AppArmor 3 (or higher) in 20.04 and we'd like to incrementally
update to it to test the new features that
** Changed in: apparmor (Ubuntu)
Status: In Progress => New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apparmor in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1817799
Title:
[FFe] apparmor 2.13
Status in apparmor p
** Description changed:
Feature Freeze exception for AppArmor 2.13.2
The security team is pushing to get AppArmor 2.13 into 19.04 since we
- want AppArmor 3 (or higher) in 20.04 and we'd like to incrementally
- update to it to test the new features that are available now and make
- the over
** Changed in: iptables (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Jamie Strandboge (jdstrand)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to iptables in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1820317
Title:
The firewa
Thank you for you report. Please note that for usability a default
ruleset is put in use by design and documented in the ufw(8) man page.
Users are free to fine-tune those defaults for site-specific needs as
described in the ufw-framework(8) man page. As a result option 'a' is
out of scope. Option
FYI, disco now has 2.38 (I've updated the description accordingly).
** Description changed:
Feature Freeze exception for AppArmor 2.13.2
The security team is pushing to get AppArmor 2.13 into 19.04 since we
want AppArmor 3 (or higher) in 20.04 and we'd like to update to 2.13.2
to have
** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #914694
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=914694
** Also affects: iptables (Debian) via
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=914694
Importance: Unknown
Status: Unknown
--
You received this bug notification becaus
Are there additional steps that need to occur?
** Changed in: iptables (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Incomplete
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to iptables in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1820114
Tit
FYI, I cannot reproduce this with even less memory:
$ iptables --version
iptables v1.6.1
$ free
totalusedfree shared buff/cache available
Mem: 265712 114824 667441024 84144 36024
Swap: 0 0
$ ./remove-package -m "1.8.2 abandoned, will wait for 1.8.3 (LP: #1820317)" -s
disco-proposed iptables
Removing packages from disco-proposed:
iptables 1.8.2-4ubuntu1 in disco
iptables 1.8.2-4ubuntu1 in disco amd64
iptables 1.8.2-4ubuntu1 in disco arm64
I took a look at this and found that:
a) firewalld root-unittests autopkgtests fail when using either iptables 1.6 or
1.8 in release due to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1601610 and
the failure is: "2019-03-24 17:30:19 ERROR: COMMAND_FAILED: '/sbin/ipset add
foobar 10.1.2.0/22' fa
I upload 0.6.3-5ubuntu4 for the Depends/Recommends update but expect it
to fail due to the ipset issues. I filed bug 1821596 for that.
** Changed in: firewalld (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Fix Committed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packa
** Description changed:
[Impact]
This bug is the master bug for a one time SRU of ufw to the new 0.36
release. Typically patches would be individually backported like normal,
but the new 'prepend' command feature is the impetus for this SRU and it
contains most of the code changes. Ot
FYI, I've reuploaded 0.36 to bionic-proposed and cosmic-proposed after
updating this master bug's description.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ufw in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1811129
Title:
up
FYI, I've reuploaded 0.36 to bionic-proposed and cosmic-proposed after
updating the master bug's description.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ufw in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1368411
Title:
Can
** Description changed:
[Impact]
This bug is the master bug for a one time SRU of ufw to the new 0.36
release. Typically patches would be individually backported like normal,
but the new 'prepend' command feature is the impetus for this SRU and it
- contains most of the code changes. Ot
I've confirmed that the "Could not open '/var/lib/snapd/apparmor/snap-
confine'" is not present in standard install of disco. This was a local
issue.
I've also updated the packaging to remove the "dpkg: warning: unable to
delete old directory '/etc/apparmor.d/cache': Directory not empty"
message.
Uploaded to disco-proposed.
** Changed in: apparmor (Ubuntu)
Status: Triaged => Fix Committed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apparmor in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1817799
Title:
[FFe]
Tested this is fixed in cosmic:
$ apt-cache policy ufw
ufw:
Installed: 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.10.1
Candidate: 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.10.1
Version table:
*** 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.10.1 500
500 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu cosmic-proposed/main amd64
Packages
500 http://us.archive.ubunt
Tested this is fixed in cosmic:
$ apt-cache policy ufw
ufw:
Installed: 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.10.1
Candidate: 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.10.1
Version table:
*** 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.10.1 500
500 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu cosmic-proposed/main amd64
Packages
500 http://us.archive.ubunt
Verified this is fixed in bionic:
$ apt-cache policy ufw
ufw:
Installed: 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.04.1
Candidate: 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.04.1
Version table:
*** 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.04.1 500
500 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu bionic-proposed/main amd64
Packages
500 http://us.archive.ubu
Verified this is fixed in bionic:
$ apt-cache policy ufw
ufw:
Installed: 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.04.1
Candidate: 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.04.1
Version table:
*** 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.04.1 500
500 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu bionic-proposed/main amd64
Packages
500 http://us.archive.ubu
Verified this is fixed in bionic:
$ apt-cache policy ufw
ufw:
Installed: 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.04.1
Candidate: 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.04.1
Version table:
*** 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.04.1 500
500 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu bionic-proposed/main amd64
Packages
500 http://us.archive.ubu
Tested this is fixed in cosmic:
$ apt-cache policy ufw
ufw:
Installed: 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.10.1
Candidate: 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.10.1
Version table:
*** 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.10.1 500
500 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu cosmic-proposed/main amd64
Packages
500 http://us.archive.ubunt
Verified this is fixed in bionic:
$ apt-cache policy ufw
ufw:
Installed: 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.04.1
Candidate: 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.04.1
Version table:
*** 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.04.1 500
500 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu bionic-proposed/main amd64
Packages
500 http://us.archive.ubu
Tested this is fixed in cosmic:
$ apt-cache policy ufw
ufw:
Installed: 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.10.1
Candidate: 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.10.1
Version table:
*** 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.10.1 500
500 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu cosmic-proposed/main amd64
Packages
500 http://us.archive.ubunt
Verified this is fixed in bionic:
$ apt-cache policy ufw
ufw:
Installed: 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.04.1
Candidate: 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.04.1
Version table:
*** 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.04.1 500
500 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu bionic-proposed/main amd64
Packages
500 http://us.archive.ubu
Tested this is fixed in cosmic:
$ apt-cache policy ufw
ufw:
Installed: 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.10.1
Candidate: 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.10.1
Version table:
*** 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.10.1 500
500 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu cosmic-proposed/main amd64
Packages
500 http://us.archive.ubunt
I've verified this on cosmic using a combination of test-ufw.py from QRT
(which in addition to various smoke/etc tests, runs all the tests in the
testsuite, including root/iptables tests):
ufw:
Installed: 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.10.1
Candidate: 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.10.1
Version table:
*** 0.36-0ubuntu
I've verified this on bionic using a combination of test-ufw.py from QRT
(which in addition to various smoke/etc tests, runs all the tests in the
testsuite, including root/iptables tests):
ufw:
Installed: 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.04.1
Candidate: 0.36-0ubuntu0.18.04.1
Version table:
*** 0.36-0ubuntu
** Summary changed:
- expr-simplify optimization slows click policy compilation
+ expr-simplify optimization slows click/snap policy compilation
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to click-apparmor in Ubuntu.
https:
It might be nice to provide this on older LTS releases too.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ubuntu-keyring in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1798073
Title:
[SRU] Provide 2018 archive signing key on
I echo ahasenack's question. /etc/letsencrypt/** is pretty broad
(especially if it contains private keys).
Once those details are worked out, updating slapd is conceptually fine.
We may want to consider updating the ssl_certs and ssl_keys abstractions
accordingly if letsencrypt organizing things c
Please note that the various rules files are there for admins to adjust
as needed. However, to work with other programs on the system, I
reiterate that by default ufw will not flush anything it doesn't manage
itself (MANAGE_BUILTINS, as mentioned, controls this behavior). If
someone adds rules to t
** Changed in: ufw
Status: New => In Progress
** Changed in: ufw
Assignee: (unassigned) => Jamie Strandboge (jdstrand)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ufw in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchp
Thanks for all the feedback! FYI, since '1' in ufw corresponds to the
literal rule number '1', this is going to be implemented with a new
'prepend' command. Eg:
$ sudo ufw allow 22/tcp
$ sudo ufw allow from 1.2.3.4
$ sudo ufw allow from 2001:db8::/32
$ sudo ufw status numbered
...
[1] 22/tcp
** Changed in: ufw
Status: In Progress => Fix Committed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ufw in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1368411
Title:
Cannot insert IPV6 rule before IPV4 rules
Status
** Changed in: ufw (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => Triaged
** Changed in: ufw (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Jamie Strandboge (jdstrand)
** Also affects: ufw (Ubuntu Cosmic)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Also affects: ufw (Ubuntu Disco)
Importance:
Status: Triaged => Incomplete
** Changed in: ufw
Assignee: Jamie Strandboge (jdstrand) => (unassigned)
** Changed in: ufw (Ubuntu)
Assignee: Jamie Strandboge (jdstrand) => (unassigned)
** Changed in: ufw (Ubuntu Xenial)
Assignee: Jamie Strandboge (jdstrand) =>
This was committed to ufw a while ago and will be in the upcoming 0.36,
which I plan to SRU back to bionic.
** Changed in: ufw
Status: In Progress => Fix Committed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ufw in
** Changed in: ufw
Importance: Undecided => Medium
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ufw in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1775043
Title:
bash completion not working: uses deprecated have()
Status
** Changed in: ufw
Importance: Undecided => Low
** Changed in: ufw
Importance: Low => Medium
** Changed in: ufw (Ubuntu Disco)
Status: Triaged => In Progress
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ufw i
This will be fixed with the new feature for concurrent updates, which is
scheduled for ufw 0.36.
** Changed in: ufw (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => In Progress
** Changed in: ufw (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Jamie Strandboge (jdstrand)
** Also affects: ufw (Ubuntu
** Changed in: ufw (Ubuntu)
Status: Triaged => In Progress
** Changed in: ufw (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Jamie Strandboge (jdstrand)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ufw in Ubuntu.
** Package changed: ufw (Ubuntu) => rpcbind (Ubuntu)
** Summary changed:
- package ufw (not installed) failed to install/upgrade: subprocess installed
post-removal script returned error exit status 1
+ failed to install/upgrade: subprocess installed post-removal script returned
error exit statu
ed => Low
** Changed in: ufw (Ubuntu Cosmic)
Importance: Undecided => Low
** Changed in: ufw (Ubuntu Disco)
Importance: Undecided => Low
** Changed in: ufw (Ubuntu Disco)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Jamie Strandboge (jdstrand)
** Changed in: ufw (Ubuntu Cosmic)
Assignee:
** Also affects: ufw (Ubuntu Disco)
Importance: Medium
Assignee: Jamie Strandboge (jdstrand)
Status: In Progress
** Also affects: ufw (Ubuntu Cosmic)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Also affects: ufw (Ubuntu Bionic)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
in: ufw (Ubuntu Bionic)
Importance: Undecided => Medium
** Changed in: ufw (Ubuntu Disco)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Jamie Strandboge (jdstrand)
** Changed in: ufw (Ubuntu Cosmic)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Jamie Strandboge (jdstrand)
** Changed in: ufw (Ubuntu Bionic)
** Also affects: ufw (Ubuntu Cosmic)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Also affects: ufw (Ubuntu Disco)
Importance: Medium
Assignee: Jamie Strandboge (jdstrand)
Status: In Progress
** Also affects: ufw (Ubuntu Bionic)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
This was fixed in 0.35.
** Changed in: ufw (Ubuntu)
Status: In Progress => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ufw in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1155250
Title:
ufw should error
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1664133 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1664133
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 1664133
ipv6 multicast pings don't return
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscrib
** Changed in: ufw (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ufw in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1749985
Title:
dpkg: error processing package libc-bin (--configure):
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 910324 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/910324
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 910324
Add directory support for before.rules and after.rules
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages,
The ufw bug is being tracking in bug 1775043. Removing that task.
** No longer affects: ufw (Ubuntu)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to jackd2 in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1792835
Title:
Bash com
** Package changed: ufw (Ubuntu) => language-selector (Ubuntu)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ufw in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1724793
Title:
Error localization
Status in language-selector pa
** Also affects: ufw (Ubuntu Disco)
Importance: Undecided
Assignee: Jamie Strandboge (jdstrand)
Status: Triaged
** Changed in: ufw (Ubuntu Disco)
Status: Triaged => In Progress
** Changed in: ufw (Ubuntu Disco)
Importance: Undecided => Medium
** Changed in: ufw (
@Matt, there aren't any errors in your journalctl output that I can see.
Without removing the change to /lib/ufw/ufw-init yet, can you reboot
until you see the problem, and then before you correct the issue, can
you attach the output of all of the following:
1. journalctl --no-pager > /tmp/journa
** Changed in: ufw (Ubuntu Disco)
Status: Triaged => In Progress
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ufw in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1602834
Title:
obsolete conffiles not cleaned up on upgr
This is fixed in the new 0.36 release.
** Changed in: ufw
Status: Fix Committed => Fix Released
** Changed in: ufw
Assignee: (unassigned) => Jamie Strandboge (jdstrand)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, wh
This is fixed in the new 0.36 release.
** Changed in: ufw
Status: Fix Committed => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ufw in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1633698
Title:
ufw befor
This is fixed in the new 0.36 release.
** Changed in: ufw
Status: Fix Committed => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ufw in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1664133
Title:
ipv6 mult
This is fixed in the new 0.36 release.
** Changed in: ufw
Status: Fix Committed => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ufw in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1775043
Title:
bash comp
This is fixed in the new 0.36 release.
** Changed in: ufw
Status: Fix Committed => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ufw in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1368411
Title:
Cannot in
This looks to be a local issue:
insserv: warning: script 'K20.depend.boot' missing LSB tags and overrides
insserv: warning: script 'K20.depend.start' missing LSB tags and overrides
insserv: There is a loop at service plymouth if started
insserv: There is a loop between service plymouth and procps
@Matt you have both ufw and firewalld installed and running. You should
disable/remove firewalld. Marking this as 'Invalid' for now, but please
feel free to report back if you still see a bug in ufw after addressing
firewalld.
** Changed in: ufw
Status: Incomplete => Invalid
** Changed in:
@Ian - how did you generate this profile? Is this something that snapd
generated (it doesn't look like typical snap-update-ns profiles...)? If
it did, can you attach the snap.yaml (this seems like atypical usage of
the layouts feature)?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a memb
FYI, libseccomp is now published: https://usn.ubuntu.com/4001-1/
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to libseccomp in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1830859
Title:
new libseccomp 2.4 (in proposed) makes re
libseccomp was updated in trusty ESM here:
https://usn.ubuntu.com/4001-2/
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to libseccomp in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1586496
Title:
Upgrade libseccomp library in ma
This could be argued as Won't Fix since trusty is out of standard
support, but it did, in the end, receive an upgrade in trusty esm, so
marking Fix Released.
** Changed in: libseccomp (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ub
This was fixed in upstream 2.3.2 which was fixed in cosmic. As of
https://usn.ubuntu.com/4001-1/ pulling back 2.4.1, this is now fixed
everywhere.
** Changed in: libseccomp (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
FYI, please note that seccomp 2.4.1 was pushed to bionic in
https://usn.ubuntu.com/4001-1/ on 2019/05/30. It shouldn't affect this
bug report AFAICT because while the 2.4.1 Ubuntu packaging drops these
patches, the upstream commits for lp-1815415-arch-update-syscalls-for-
Linux-4.9.patch and lp-181
** Description changed:
With 2.13.2 and the most recent testsuite patches from the 2.13 branch,
I find that the cache works correctly when no options are specified. Eg
# setup
$ mkdir -p /tmp/aa/cache /tmp/aa/profiles
$ cp /etc/apparmor.d/sbin.dhclient /tmp/aa/profiles/
# no opti
riaged
** Also affects: apparmor (Ubuntu Disco)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Changed in: apparmor (Ubuntu Eoan)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Jamie Strandboge (jdstrand)
** Changed in: apparmor (Ubuntu Disco)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Jamie Strandboge (jdstrand)
*
** Changed in: apparmor (Ubuntu Eoan)
Status: In Progress => Fix Committed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apparmor in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1820068
Title:
specifying -O no-expr-simp
** Changed in: apparmor
Status: In Progress => Fix Released
** Changed in: apparmor (Ubuntu Disco)
Status: Triaged => In Progress
** Changed in: apparmor
Assignee: (unassigned) => John Johansen (jjohansen)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubun
** Description changed:
+ [Impact]
+
+ * AppArmor 2.13 unconditionally invalidates its cache when parser options
are specified. To decrease compile times for ARM systems, -O no-expr-simplify
has been used in Ubuntu for click and snap policy for many years, but was
temporarily disabled during
Ubuntu 14.04 LTS is now out of standard support and evince is not
included in ESM.
** Changed in: evince (Ubuntu Trusty)
Status: In Progress => Won't Fix
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apparmor in Ubun
Thank you for using ufw and filing a bug. Please keep in mind that the
firewall is sensitive to rule order. What is the output of 'sudo ufw
show numbered'?
** Changed in: ufw (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Incomplete
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch
FYI, I tested this and 2.13.2-9ubuntu6.1 fixes this bug.
I also executed
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Process/Merges/TestPlans/AppArmor (sans dbus
optional bits) and everything passed.
Lastly, I wanted to double check the performance impact of no-expr-
simplify on amd64 especially as it pertains to cl
Retriaging these down to Medium. People worked around this in different
ways and High was obviously inflated since it isn't fixed yet (I just
verified with 5.0.0-25.26-generic and apparmor 2.13.2-9ubuntu6.1).
** Changed in: apparmor
Importance: High => Medium
** Changed in: apparmor (Ubuntu)
This still seems to be a problem on Ubuntu 19.04. Ie, if I do:
$ sudo systemctl status systemd-rfkill
● systemd-rfkill.service - Load/Save RF Kill Switch Status
Loaded: loaded (/lib/systemd/system/systemd-rfkill.service; static; vendor
preset:
...
$ rfkill block bluetooth
$ rfkill
ID TYPE
** Description changed:
+
+ # Original summary: pulseaudio built with --enable-snappy but 'Enable
+ Snappy support: no'
+
+ # Original description
+
From https://launchpadlibrarian.net/377100864/buildlog_ubuntu-cosmic-
amd64.pulseaudio_1%3A12.0-1ubuntu1_BUILDING.txt.gz:
...
dh_auto_c
** Attachment added: "test-snapd-audio-record_1_amd64.snap"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pulseaudio/+bug/1781428/+attachment/5292539/+files/test-snapd-audio-record_1_amd64.snap
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which i
** Description changed:
+ [Impact]
+ Ubuntu 16.10 added rudimentary snap support to disable audio recording if the
connecting process was a snap. By Ubuntu 18.04, something changed in the build
resulting in 'Enable Snappy support: no' with audio recording no longer being
mediated by pulseaudio
Attaching test-snapd-pulseaudio and test-snapd-audio-record snaps.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to pulseaudio in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1781428
Title:
please enable snap mediation support
S
** Description changed:
[Impact]
Ubuntu 16.10 added rudimentary snap support to disable audio recording if the
connecting process was a snap. By Ubuntu 18.04, something changed in the build
resulting in 'Enable Snappy support: no' with audio recording no longer being
mediated by pulseaudio
** Description changed:
[Impact]
Ubuntu 16.10 added rudimentary snap support to disable audio recording if the
connecting process was a snap. By Ubuntu 18.04, something changed in the build
resulting in 'Enable Snappy support: no' with audio recording no longer being
mediated by pulseaudio
** Changed in: pulseaudio (Ubuntu Xenial)
Status: In Progress => Triaged
** Changed in: pulseaudio (Ubuntu Bionic)
Status: In Progress => Triaged
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to pulseaudio in Ubu
@Ivan, we are going to fix snapd for the excessive memory usage.
AppArmor upstream already uses expr-simplify by default and newer
release of Ubuntu use parser.conf to set -O no-expr-simplify so users
can manage the setting like any other conffile.
--
You received this bug notification because yo
** Changed in: ufw (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Triaged
** Changed in: ufw (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided => Medium
** Also affects: ufw
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Changed in: ufw
Status: New => Triaged
** Changed in: ufw
Importance: Undecided => Medium
--
Y
This looks to be a local system issue with python3-minimal being removed
and then the prerm scripts from various programs failing due to
debhelper scripts that the package use can't find the required binaries.
Removing python3.6-minimal (3.6.8-1~16.04.york1) ...
Unlinking and removing bytecode for
** Changed in: apparmor (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided => Medium
** Changed in: apparmor (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Triaged
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apparmor in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net
Public bug reported:
snapd needs the ability to call 'groupdel --extrausers foo' to clean up
after itself, but --extrausers is currently unsupported.
** Affects: snapd
Importance: Undecided
Assignee: Michael Vogt (mvo)
Status: New
** Affects: shadow (Ubuntu)
Importance: U
101 - 200 of 1885 matches
Mail list logo
