[Touch-packages] [Bug 2061214] Re: [SRU] Software Sources is not compatible with deb822
Yeah sorry folks this was a bit awkward, to avoid respinning other images we temporarily spun out software-properties-qt into its own package (0.99.48.1) and fixed it there, and hence there was no bug closure or anything. This will fold back into the main package in a zero-day SRU in 0.99.49. ** Also affects: software-properties-qt (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Changed in: software-properties-qt (Ubuntu Noble) Status: New => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to software-properties in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2061214 Title: [SRU] Software Sources is not compatible with deb822 Status in software-properties package in Ubuntu: Confirmed Status in software-properties-qt package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in software-properties source package in Noble: Confirmed Status in software-properties-qt source package in Noble: Fix Released Bug description: [ Impact ] Ubuntu 24.04 now uses deb822 to represent software sources for deb packages, instead of /etc/apt/sources.list. The complete rationale for this change can be found here: https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/spec- apt-deb822-sources-by-default/29333 software-properties has two graphical frontends for editing these software sources, one is GTK-based and the other is Qt-based. When the underlying change to deb822 sources was made, the GTK-based frontend and the DBus backend interface gained support. The original bug report shown below informed us of the lack of deb822 support in the Qt frontend, which results in a broken, non-functional interface when attempting to view or edit most values on the first two tabs. The fix for this is to implement a Qt dialog for deb822 sources that somewhat matches the existing GTK interface. [ Test Plan ] Install software-properties-qt 0.99.48 or earlier. Reproducing the bug: 1. From the menu, open Software Sources. Alternatively, run `sudo -E software-properties-qt` in a terminal. 2. Observe that all four checkboxes on the Ubuntu Software tab (main, universe, restricted, and multiverse) are unchecked. 3. Move to the Other Software tab and observe that there are no items in the list. Upgrade to software-properties-qt 0.99.49. Intended functionality: 1. From the menu, open Software Sources. Alternatively, run `sudo -E software-properties-qt` in a terminal. 2. Observe that one or more checkboxes on the Ubuntu Software tab (representing main, universe, restricted, or multiverse) are checked. Toggle one or more of the checkboxes. 3. Using a text editor of some kind (perhaps Vim), confirm that /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ubuntu.sources reflects your changes. 4. Switch to the Other Software tab, there should be one item in the list. 5. Select that item, then click Edit at the bottom of the dialog. Make a modification to every field on the screen, or a combination of fields you would like to test. All fields should work. 6. Click the OK button at the bottom of the dialog to confirm the changes, then click Edit for that item again. The changes you made should be reflected (meaning, the changes were saved.) 7. Using a text editor of some kind (perhaps Vim), confirm that /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ubuntu.sources reflects your changes. [ Where problems could occur ] This is well-tested code. That being said, the following small edge cases exist: - If you create a very large amount of rows, it infinitely expands the dialog without a scroll wheel. This is the same functionality as the GTK frontend. - Error validation is not performed on the deb822 lines, they are simply written to the ubuntu.sources file. This is good as a starting point, but also relies on the appropriate update notifier handling these errors. This is the same functionality as the GTK frontend. In a future update, this functionality could be broken by one or more of the following underlying changes: - Changes to the software-properties backend which are only implemented for the GTK frontend. - Changes to the location or formatting of the ubuntu.sources file. - Regressions in the Python bindings for Qt 5, which are rare but possible. - Regressions in Python itself. [ Other Info ] Ubuntu Studio's live ISO and installed system are affected by this. Only Lubuntu's installed system is affected by this. [ Original Report ] Upgrading Lubuntu Jammy to Lubuntu Noble using TUI results in "Software sources" not correctly updated after upgrade. Prompt= shows normal and not LTS Used command sudo do-release-upgrade -d Otherwise the upgrade is good see attached screenshot ProblemType: Bug DistroRelease: Ubuntu 24.04 Package: software-properties-common 0.99.46 ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 6.8.0-22.22-generic 6.8.1 Uname: Linux 6.8.0-22-generic x86_64 ApportVersion:
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2062979] Re: unable to create ubuntu-noble image due to dictionaries-common config failure
I'm unsubscribing as I only did a no-change rebuild. I'd generally advise against using LC_ALL=C in any setting however, it's generally a bad idea and you should use LC_ALL=C.UTF-8 instead. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to dictionaries-common in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2062979 Title: unable to create ubuntu-noble image due to dictionaries-common config failure Status in aspell package in Ubuntu: New Status in dictionaries-common package in Ubuntu: New Bug description: this is running with LC_ALL=C the following are output in terminal when configuring dictionaries- common Setting up dictionaries-common (1.29.7) ... Processing triggers for dictionaries-common (1.29.7) ... aspell-autobuildhash: processing: en [en-common]. Error: /dev/null:1: The key "/usr/bin/aspell" is unknown. Undefined subroutine ::subst called at /usr/sbin/aspell-autobuildhash line 54. dpkg: error processing package dictionaries-common (--configure): installed dictionaries-common package post-installation script subprocess returned error exit status 2 Errors were encountered while processing: dictionaries-common this worked without issues when I last built images of ubuntu-noble in late February 2024 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/aspell/+bug/2062979/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2061214] Re: Software sources not correctly updated after upgrade and/or new installs
The last comment made me realize we are talking about the Qt frontend here, and yes, sure, we only ever implemented deb822 for the Gtk frontend and the Dbus backend. The Qt frontend needs to gain a deb822 entry editor dialog, possibly some rendering fixes for deb822 source entries, and swap on deb822=True in the SoftwareProperties.__init__() supercall to enable it. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to software-properties in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2061214 Title: Software sources not correctly updated after upgrade and/or new installs Status in software-properties package in Ubuntu: New Bug description: Upgrading Lubuntu Jammy to Lubuntu Noble using TUI results in "Software sources" not correctly updated after upgrade. Prompt= shows normal and not LTS Used command sudo do-release-upgrade -d Otherwise the upgrade is good see attached screenshot ProblemType: Bug DistroRelease: Ubuntu 24.04 Package: software-properties-common 0.99.46 ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 6.8.0-22.22-generic 6.8.1 Uname: Linux 6.8.0-22-generic x86_64 ApportVersion: 2.28.0-0ubuntu1 Architecture: amd64 CasperMD5CheckResult: unknown CurrentDesktop: LXQt Date: Sat Apr 13 11:44:28 2024 InstallationDate: Installed on 2024-04-13 (0 days ago) InstallationMedia: Lubuntu 22.04.4 LTS "Jammy Jellyfish" - Release amd64 (20240331) PackageArchitecture: all SourcePackage: software-properties UpgradeStatus: Upgraded to noble on 2024-04-13 (0 days ago) mtime.conffile..etc.init.d.apport: 2024-02-22T14:20:00 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/software-properties/+bug/2061214/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2063101] [NEW] Update apt override from important to required
Public bug reported: APT is currently overriden from required to important, this is causing it not to be installed by default when bootstrapping with mmdebstrap. ** Affects: apt (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Assignee: Ubuntu Package Archive Administrators (ubuntu-archive) Status: New ** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu) Assignee: (unassigned) => Ubuntu Package Archive Administrators (ubuntu-archive) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2063101 Title: Update apt override from important to required Status in apt package in Ubuntu: New Bug description: APT is currently overriden from required to important, this is causing it not to be installed by default when bootstrapping with mmdebstrap. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/2063101/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2061214] Re: Software sources not correctly updated after upgrade
Please attach a tarball of your /etc/apt/sources.list and /etc/apt/sources.list.d ** Changed in: software-properties (Ubuntu) Status: New => Incomplete -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to software-properties in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2061214 Title: Software sources not correctly updated after upgrade Status in software-properties package in Ubuntu: Incomplete Bug description: Upgrading Lubuntu Jammy to Lubuntu Noble using TUI results in "Software sources" not correctly updated after upgrade. Prompt= shows normal and not LTS Used command sudo do-release-upgrade -d Otherwise the upgrade is good see attached screenshot ProblemType: Bug DistroRelease: Ubuntu 24.04 Package: software-properties-common 0.99.46 ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 6.8.0-22.22-generic 6.8.1 Uname: Linux 6.8.0-22-generic x86_64 ApportVersion: 2.28.0-0ubuntu1 Architecture: amd64 CasperMD5CheckResult: unknown CurrentDesktop: LXQt Date: Sat Apr 13 11:44:28 2024 InstallationDate: Installed on 2024-04-13 (0 days ago) InstallationMedia: Lubuntu 22.04.4 LTS "Jammy Jellyfish" - Release amd64 (20240331) PackageArchitecture: all SourcePackage: software-properties UpgradeStatus: Upgraded to noble on 2024-04-13 (0 days ago) mtime.conffile..etc.init.d.apport: 2024-02-22T14:20:00 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/software-properties/+bug/2061214/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2060721] Re: APT 2.8.0: Promote weak key warnings to errors
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu Noble) Status: New => Triaged ** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu Noble) Assignee: (unassigned) => Julian Andres Klode (juliank) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2060721 Title: APT 2.8.0: Promote weak key warnings to errors Status in apt package in Ubuntu: Triaged Status in apt source package in Noble: Triaged Bug description: ⚠️ Only land this in the release pocket after PPAs have been resigned (This bumps the apt version to 2.8.0. APT uses the odd/even number system, with 2.7.x being the development series for 2.8, and this is the only change left for the 2.8 release, safe for some minor translation/test suite improvements) (This will be uploaded after the beta and may be released before noble release, as a zero day SRU or within the weeks following the release) [Impact] APT is currently just warning about keys that it should be rejecting to give Launchpad time to resign PPAs. This needs to be bumped to an error such that the crypto policy is fully implemented and we only trust keys that are still being trusted. #2055193 A warning provides some help right now to third-parties to fix their repositories, but it's not *safe*: A repository could have multiple signing keys and be signed by a good key now, then later, a previous key still in trusted.gpg.d could be revoked and we'd degrade to warnings, which, given that we update in the background automatically, the user may not see. Other fixes: - The test suite has been made less flaky in two places - Documentation translation has been unfuzzied for URL changes in 2.7.14 [Test plan] The vast regression test suite prevents regression in other components. Additional tests are: 1. (promotion to error) Take a repository that has a weak key warning, upgrade apt and check that it is an error 2. (still valid) Check that the main Ubuntu repositories and/or resigned PPAs work correctly. We don't have any tests for the test changes or the documentation translation URL unfuzzying. [Where problems could occur] apt will start to fail updates of repositories with weak signing keys, but it will have warned users about that before. Given that it is still early in the cycle, and we only enable updates for 24.04.1, this seems the right tradeoff for future security. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/2060721/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2060721] Re: APT 2.8.0: Promote weak key warnings to errors
** Tags added: block-proposed block-proposed-noble ** Tags removed: block-proposed-noble ** Description changed: + ⚠️ Only land this in the release pocket after PPAs have been resigned + (This bumps the apt version to 2.8.0. APT uses the odd/even number system, with 2.7.x being the development series for 2.8, and this is the only change left for the 2.8 release, safe for some minor translation/test suite improvements) (This will be uploaded after the beta and may be released before noble release, as a zero day SRU or within the weeks following the release) [Impact] APT is currently just warning about keys that it should be rejecting to give Launchpad time to resign PPAs. This needs to be bumped to an error such that the crypto policy is fully implemented and we only trust keys that are still being trusted. #2055193 A warning provides some help right now to third-parties to fix their repositories, but it's not *safe*: A repository could have multiple signing keys and be signed by a good key now, then later, a previous key still in trusted.gpg.d could be revoked and we'd degrade to warnings, which, given that we update in the background automatically, the user may not see. Other fixes: - The test suite has been made less flaky in two places - Documentation translation has been unfuzzied for URL changes in 2.7.14 [Test plan] The vast regression test suite prevents regression in other components. Additional tests are: 1. (promotion to error) Take a repository that has a weak key warning, upgrade apt and check that it is an error 2. (still valid) Check that the main Ubuntu repositories and/or resigned PPAs work correctly. We don't have any tests for the test changes or the documentation translation URL unfuzzying. [Where problems could occur] apt will start to fail updates of repositories with weak signing keys, but it will have warned users about that before. Given that it is still early in the cycle, and we only enable updates for 24.04.1, this seems the right tradeoff for future security. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2060721 Title: APT 2.8.0: Promote weak key warnings to errors Status in apt package in Ubuntu: New Status in apt source package in Noble: New Bug description: ⚠️ Only land this in the release pocket after PPAs have been resigned (This bumps the apt version to 2.8.0. APT uses the odd/even number system, with 2.7.x being the development series for 2.8, and this is the only change left for the 2.8 release, safe for some minor translation/test suite improvements) (This will be uploaded after the beta and may be released before noble release, as a zero day SRU or within the weeks following the release) [Impact] APT is currently just warning about keys that it should be rejecting to give Launchpad time to resign PPAs. This needs to be bumped to an error such that the crypto policy is fully implemented and we only trust keys that are still being trusted. #2055193 A warning provides some help right now to third-parties to fix their repositories, but it's not *safe*: A repository could have multiple signing keys and be signed by a good key now, then later, a previous key still in trusted.gpg.d could be revoked and we'd degrade to warnings, which, given that we update in the background automatically, the user may not see. Other fixes: - The test suite has been made less flaky in two places - Documentation translation has been unfuzzied for URL changes in 2.7.14 [Test plan] The vast regression test suite prevents regression in other components. Additional tests are: 1. (promotion to error) Take a repository that has a weak key warning, upgrade apt and check that it is an error 2. (still valid) Check that the main Ubuntu repositories and/or resigned PPAs work correctly. We don't have any tests for the test changes or the documentation translation URL unfuzzying. [Where problems could occur] apt will start to fail updates of repositories with weak signing keys, but it will have warned users about that before. Given that it is still early in the cycle, and we only enable updates for 24.04.1, this seems the right tradeoff for future security. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/2060721/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2054908] Re: gpg-wks-server pulls in postfix
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 2060578 *** https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2060578 This was fixed in u-r-u in bug 2060578 ** No longer affects: ubuntu-release-upgrader (Ubuntu) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054908 Title: gpg-wks-server pulls in postfix Status in Auto Package Testing: Fix Released Status in apt package in Ubuntu: Invalid Status in gnupg2 package in Ubuntu: Won't Fix Status in munin package in Ubuntu: Invalid Bug description: Example 1 I did a sudo apt dist-upgrade today on my developer machine running Ubuntu Desktop 24.04 LTS and it surprisingly pulled in postfix. I did not built this into a full reproducible test case because I found another test case… Example 2 munin's autopkgtests are now failing because postfix is now unexpectedly being installed. https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/munin/noble/amd64 Other Info gnupg2's changelog indicates that there was an attempt to avoid this misbehavior by having gnupg only Suggest gpg-wks-server. In fact, there is **nothing** in Ubuntu 24.04 LTS that Depends or Recommends gpg-wks-server. I added a munin bug task as a pointer in case anyone wonder's about the autopkgtest regression but I don't believe munin needs any changes. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/auto-package-testing/+bug/2054908/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 1951491] Re: Can't run snaps: .slice/session-1.scope is not a snap cgroup
** Tags removed: rls-nn-incoming -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to systemd in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1951491 Title: Can't run snaps: .slice/session-1.scope is not a snap cgroup Status in X2Go: New Status in Xpra Terminal Server: New Status in snapd package in Ubuntu: Incomplete Status in systemd package in Ubuntu: Incomplete Status in x2goserver package in Ubuntu: Incomplete Status in snapd package in Debian: New Status in snapd package in Fedora: New Bug description: I just upgraded from hirsute to impish using do-release-upgrade. On the upgraded system, I can't run either firefox or chromium (both of which worked fine under hirsute). Both fail with: /user.slice/user-NNN.slice/session-1.scope is not a snap cgroup where NNN is my uid With firefox, I was able to fix the problem with: snap remove --purge firefox apt purge firefox apt install firefox Now firefox works. But I tried the same thing substituting chromium- browser for firefox, and it didn't help: chromium fails with the same error message. I guess there must be something left over from the hirsute version of snapd that isn't getting noticed or cleared by the impish version? Someone suggested this might be related to bug 1850667, but that bug is marked fixed as of a couple months ago, and I just did this upgrade today. Also, it doesn't mention the error message I'm seeing. ProblemType: Bug DistroRelease: Ubuntu 21.10 Package: snapd 2.53+21.10ubuntu1 ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 5.13.0-21.21-generic 5.13.18 Uname: Linux 5.13.0-21-generic x86_64 ApportVersion: 2.20.11-0ubuntu71 Architecture: amd64 CasperMD5CheckResult: unknown Date: Thu Nov 18 18:12:45 2021 InstallationDate: Installed on 2020-04-29 (568 days ago) InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 20.04 LTS "Focal Fossa" - Release amd64 (20200423) SourcePackage: snapd UpgradeStatus: Upgraded to impish on 2021-11-18 (0 days ago) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/x2go/+bug/1951491/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2060311] Re: Setting "optional: true" to overcome he timeout "Job systemd-networkd-wait-online" does no longer work with latest noble image
** Changed in: systemd (Ubuntu)
Milestone: None => ubuntu-24.04
** Also affects: netplan.io (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Changed in: netplan.io (Ubuntu)
Milestone: None => ubuntu-24.04
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to systemd in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2060311
Title:
Setting "optional: true" to overcome he timeout "Job systemd-networkd-
wait-online" does no longer work with latest noble image
Status in Netplan:
In Progress
Status in Ubuntu on IBM z Systems:
New
Status in netplan.io package in Ubuntu:
New
Status in systemd package in Ubuntu:
Confirmed
Bug description:
Especially on s390x (but not limited to s390x) it's often the case that a
system has network devices that are not necessarily connected during boot-up
and one gets such a 2 min timeout:
"Job systemd-networkd-wait-online. Start running (1min 59s / no limit)"
In the past I could avoid that by setting "optional: true" post-install (no
perfect, but worked),
but this does no longer seem to work using the latest noble ISO image (Apr
5th).
Setting 'optional: true' in /etc/netplan/50-cloud-init.yaml looks like
this for me:
# This file is generated from information provided by the datasource. Changes
# to it will not persist across an instance reboot. To disable cloud-init's
# network configuration capabilities, write a file
# /etc/cloud/cloud.cfg.d/99-disable-network-config.cfg with the following:
# network: {config: disabled}
network:
ethernets:
enP1p0s0:
optional: true
dhcp4: true
enP1p0s0d1:
optional: true
dhcp4: true
enP2p0s0:
optional: true
dhcp4: true
enP2p0s0d1:
optional: true
dhcp4: true
encc000: {}
version: 2
vlans:
encc000.2653:
addresses:
- 10.11.12.15/24
gateway4: 10.11.12.1
id: 2653
link: encc000
nameservers:
addresses:
- 10.11.12.1
... can be set fine (also --dry-run does not moan, except about
dhcp4).
This worked in the past on noble, but also on older Ubuntu releases
like jammy.
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/netplan/+bug/2060311/+subscriptions
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2060581] Re: stop shipping debian-installer package hook
** Tags removed: rls-nn-incoming -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apport in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2060581 Title: stop shipping debian-installer package hook Status in apport package in Ubuntu: Fix Committed Bug description: I don't remember when we stopped producing installer images with debian-installer but it should be long enough ago that people won't be reporting bugs about it on Noble. So let's drop that from the apport package. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apport/+bug/2060581/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2060311] Re: Setting "optional: true" to overcome he timeout "Job systemd-networkd-wait-online" does no longer work with latest noble image
** Tags removed: rls-nn-incoming
** Tags added: foundations-todo
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to systemd in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2060311
Title:
Setting "optional: true" to overcome he timeout "Job systemd-networkd-
wait-online" does no longer work with latest noble image
Status in Netplan:
In Progress
Status in Ubuntu on IBM z Systems:
New
Status in netplan.io package in Ubuntu:
New
Status in systemd package in Ubuntu:
Confirmed
Bug description:
Especially on s390x (but not limited to s390x) it's often the case that a
system has network devices that are not necessarily connected during boot-up
and one gets such a 2 min timeout:
"Job systemd-networkd-wait-online. Start running (1min 59s / no limit)"
In the past I could avoid that by setting "optional: true" post-install (no
perfect, but worked),
but this does no longer seem to work using the latest noble ISO image (Apr
5th).
Setting 'optional: true' in /etc/netplan/50-cloud-init.yaml looks like
this for me:
# This file is generated from information provided by the datasource. Changes
# to it will not persist across an instance reboot. To disable cloud-init's
# network configuration capabilities, write a file
# /etc/cloud/cloud.cfg.d/99-disable-network-config.cfg with the following:
# network: {config: disabled}
network:
ethernets:
enP1p0s0:
optional: true
dhcp4: true
enP1p0s0d1:
optional: true
dhcp4: true
enP2p0s0:
optional: true
dhcp4: true
enP2p0s0d1:
optional: true
dhcp4: true
encc000: {}
version: 2
vlans:
encc000.2653:
addresses:
- 10.11.12.15/24
gateway4: 10.11.12.1
id: 2653
link: encc000
nameservers:
addresses:
- 10.11.12.1
... can be set fine (also --dry-run does not moan, except about
dhcp4).
This worked in the past on noble, but also on older Ubuntu releases
like jammy.
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/netplan/+bug/2060311/+subscriptions
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2059550] Re: autopkgtest failures on 1:5.0.3-2ubuntu3 (Noble)
Sponsored, thanks ** Changed in: lxc (Ubuntu) Status: New => Fix Committed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to lxc in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2059550 Title: autopkgtest failures on 1:5.0.3-2ubuntu3 (Noble) Status in lxc package in Ubuntu: Fix Committed Bug description: We can see autopkgtest failures on Noble: https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/lxc 1:5.0.3-2ubuntu2 from noble-proposed/universe Details from log (https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/results/autopkgtest-noble/noble/amd64/l/lxc/20240327_203000_ce7d4@/log.gz): = 3266s Removing autopkgtest-satdep (0) ... 3269s autopkgtest [20:29:48]: test no-devel: [--- 3269s + grep LXC_DEVEL /usr/include/lxc/version.h 3269s + grep 0 3269s #define LXC_DEVEL 0 3269s autopkgtest [20:29:48]: test no-devel: ---] 3269s autopkgtest [20:29:48]: test no-devel: - - - - - - - - - - results - - - - - - - - - - 3269s no-devel PASS 3269s autopkgtest [20:29:48]: summary 3269s exercise FAIL non-zero exit status 1 3269s unprivileged-containers FAIL non-zero exit status 1 3269s basics-create-destroy PASS (superficial) 3269s no-devel PASS = unprivileged-containers = 1896s Unpacking the rootfs 1900s 1900s --- 1900s You just created an Ubuntu mantic amd64 (20240326_07:42) container. 1900s 1900s To enable SSH, run: apt install openssh-server 1900s No default root or user password are set by LXC. 1900s + systemd-run --scope --quiet --user --property=Delegate=yes lxc-start -n mycontainer 1900s Failed to connect to bus: No medium found = exercise = 1113s FAIL: lxc-tests: /usr/bin/lxc-test-unpriv 1113s --- 1113s Name: c1 1113s State: RUNNING 1113s PID:52927 1113s Link: veth1001_HZ75 1113s TX bytes: 0 bytes 1113s RX bytes: 0 bytes 1113s Total bytes: 0 bytes 1113s Name: c1 1113s State: RUNNING 1113s PID:52994 1113s Link: veth1001_ujGT 1113s TX bytes: 0 bytes 1113s RX bytes: 0 bytes 1113s Total bytes: 0 bytes 1113s lxc-copy: c1: ../src/lxc/utils.c: lxc_drop_groups: 1365 Operation not permitted - Failed to drop supplimentary groups <...> 1113s info: Removing crontab ... 1113s info: Removing user `lxcunpriv' ... 1113s FAIL 1113s --- 1114s PASS: lxc-tests: /usr/bin/lxc-test-usernic 1114s PASS: lxc-tests: /usr/bin/lxc-test-usernsexec 1114s PASS: lxc-tests: /usr/bin/lxc-test-utils 1114s 1114s SUMMARY: pass=55, fail=1, ignored=0 1115s autopkgtest [19:53:54]: test exercise: ---] 1115s autopkgtest [19:53:54]: test exercise: - - - - - - - - - - results - - - - - - - - - - 1115s exercise FAIL non-zero exit status 1 = In the previous version we had no unprivileged-containers testsuite because it was inherited from Debian. lxc-test-unpriv was a skipped test too because we had this piece of code: https://git.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lxc/tree/debian/tests/exercise?h=applied/ubuntu/noble#n129 = # Skip some tests due to cgroup v2 incompatibility if [ -e /sys/fs/cgroup/system.slice/memory.current ]; then [ "$testbin" = "lxc-test-apparmor-mount" ] && \ ignore "$STRING" && continue [ "$testbin" = "lxc-test-autostart" ] && \ ignore "$STRING" && continue [ "$testbin" = "lxc-test-no-new-privs" ] && \ ignore "$STRING" && continue [ "$testbin" = "lxc-test-unpriv" ] && \ ignore "$STRING" && continue fi = Just compare: https://git.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lxc/tree/debian/tests/control?h=applied/ubuntu/noble and https://git.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lxc/tree/debian/tests/control?h=applied/ubuntu/noble-devel We want to fix all of this for sure, but it would be awesome to get an updated and actual version of LXC in the upcoming Ubuntu Noble release too. So, may be it makes sense to skip this tests for the sake of having LXC updated. What I found in Debian, is that autopkgtests are skipped too: https://ci.debian.net/packages/l/lxc/unstable/amd64/ Taking this into account it (probably) reasonable to skip this tests too for now. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lxc/+bug/2059550/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2060721] Re: APT 2.8.0: Promote weak key warnings to errors
** Description changed: (This bumps the apt version to 2.8.0. APT uses the odd/even number system, with 2.7.x being the development series for 2.8, and this is the only change left for the 2.8 release) (This will be uploaded after the beta and may be released before noble release, as a zero day SRU or within the weeks following the release) [Impact] APT is currently just warning about keys that it should be rejecting to give Launchpad time to resign PPAs. This needs to be bumped to an error such that the crypto policy is fully implemented and we only trust keys that are still being trusted. #2055193 A warning provides some help right now to third-parties to fix their repositories, but it's not *safe*: A repository could have multiple signing keys and be signed by a good key now, then later, a previous key still in trusted.gpg.d could be revoked and we'd degrade to warnings, which, given that we update in the background automatically, the user may not see. + Other fixes: + - The test suite has been made less flaky in two places + - Documentation translation has been unfuzzied for URL changes in 2.7.14 + [Test plan] The vast regression test suite prevents regression in other components. Additional tests are: 1. (promotion to error) Take a repository that has a weak key warning, upgrade apt and check that it is an error 2. (still valid) Check that the main Ubuntu repositories and/or resigned PPAs work correctly. + We don't have any tests for the test changes or the documentation + translation URL unfuzzying. + [Where problems could occur] apt will start to fail updates of repositories with weak signing keys, but it will have warned users about that before. Given that it is still early in the cycle, and we only enable updates for 24.04.1, this seems the right tradeoff for future security. ** Description changed: (This bumps the apt version to 2.8.0. APT uses the odd/even number system, with 2.7.x being the development series for 2.8, and this is the - only change left for the 2.8 release) + only change left for the 2.8 release, safe for some minor + translation/test suite improvements) (This will be uploaded after the beta and may be released before noble release, as a zero day SRU or within the weeks following the release) [Impact] APT is currently just warning about keys that it should be rejecting to give Launchpad time to resign PPAs. This needs to be bumped to an error such that the crypto policy is fully implemented and we only trust keys that are still being trusted. #2055193 A warning provides some help right now to third-parties to fix their repositories, but it's not *safe*: A repository could have multiple signing keys and be signed by a good key now, then later, a previous key still in trusted.gpg.d could be revoked and we'd degrade to warnings, which, given that we update in the background automatically, the user may not see. Other fixes: - The test suite has been made less flaky in two places - Documentation translation has been unfuzzied for URL changes in 2.7.14 [Test plan] The vast regression test suite prevents regression in other components. Additional tests are: 1. (promotion to error) Take a repository that has a weak key warning, upgrade apt and check that it is an error 2. (still valid) Check that the main Ubuntu repositories and/or resigned PPAs work correctly. We don't have any tests for the test changes or the documentation translation URL unfuzzying. [Where problems could occur] apt will start to fail updates of repositories with weak signing keys, but it will have warned users about that before. Given that it is still early in the cycle, and we only enable updates for 24.04.1, this seems the right tradeoff for future security. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2060721 Title: APT 2.8.0: Promote weak key warnings to errors Status in apt package in Ubuntu: New Status in apt source package in Noble: New Bug description: (This bumps the apt version to 2.8.0. APT uses the odd/even number system, with 2.7.x being the development series for 2.8, and this is the only change left for the 2.8 release, safe for some minor translation/test suite improvements) (This will be uploaded after the beta and may be released before noble release, as a zero day SRU or within the weeks following the release) [Impact] APT is currently just warning about keys that it should be rejecting to give Launchpad time to resign PPAs. This needs to be bumped to an error such that the crypto policy is fully implemented and we only trust keys that are still being trusted. #2055193 A warning provides some help right now to third-parties to fix their repositories, but it's not *safe*: A repository could have
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2060721] [NEW] APT 2.8.0: Promote weak key warnings to errors
Public bug reported: (This bumps the apt version to 2.8.0. APT uses the odd/even number system, with 2.7.x being the development series for 2.8, and this is the only change left for the 2.8 release) (This will be uploaded after the beta and may be released before noble release, as a zero day SRU or within the weeks following the release) [Impact] APT is currently just warning about keys that it should be rejecting to give Launchpad time to resign PPAs. This needs to be bumped to an error such that the crypto policy is fully implemented and we only trust keys that are still being trusted. #2055193 A warning provides some help right now to third-parties to fix their repositories, but it's not *safe*: A repository could have multiple signing keys and be signed by a good key now, then later, a previous key still in trusted.gpg.d could be revoked and we'd degrade to warnings, which, given that we update in the background automatically, the user may not see. [Test plan] The vast regression test suite prevents regression in other components. Additional tests are: 1. (promotion to error) Take a repository that has a weak key warning, upgrade apt and check that it is an error 2. (still valid) Check that the main Ubuntu repositories and/or resigned PPAs work correctly. [Where problems could occur] apt will start to fail updates of repositories with weak signing keys, but it will have warned users about that before. Given that it is still early in the cycle, and we only enable updates for 24.04.1, this seems the right tradeoff for future security. ** Affects: apt (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Affects: apt (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Description changed: [Impact] - APT is currently just warning about keys that it should be rejecting to give Launchpad time to resign PPAs. This needs to be bumped to an error such that the crypto policy is fully implemented and we only trust keys that are still being trusted. #2055193 + APT is currently just warning about keys that it should be rejecting to give Launchpad time to resign PPAs. This needs to be bumped to an error such that the crypto policy is fully implemented and we only trust keys that are still being trusted. #2055193 A warning provides some help right now to third-parties to fix their repositories, but it's not *safe*: A repository could have multiple signing keys and be signed by a good key now, then later, a previous key still in trusted.gpg.d could be revoked and we'd degrade to warnings, which, given that we update in the background automatically, the user may not see. [Test plan] The vast regression test suite prevents regression in other components. Additional tests are: 1. (promotion to error) Take a repository that has a weak key warning, upgrade apt and check that it is an error 2. (still valid) Check that the main Ubuntu repositories and/or resigned PPAs work correctly. + + [Where problems could occur] + apt will start to fail updates of repositories with weak signing keys, but it will have warned users about that before. Given that it is still early in the cycle, and we only enable updates for 24.04.1, this seems the right tradeoff for future security. ** Description changed: + (This bumps the apt version to 2.8.0. APT uses the odd/even number + system, with 2.7.x being the development series for 2.8, and this is the + only change left for the 2.8 release). + [Impact] APT is currently just warning about keys that it should be rejecting to give Launchpad time to resign PPAs. This needs to be bumped to an error such that the crypto policy is fully implemented and we only trust keys that are still being trusted. #2055193 A warning provides some help right now to third-parties to fix their repositories, but it's not *safe*: A repository could have multiple signing keys and be signed by a good key now, then later, a previous key still in trusted.gpg.d could be revoked and we'd degrade to warnings, which, given that we update in the background automatically, the user may not see. [Test plan] The vast regression test suite prevents regression in other components. Additional tests are: 1. (promotion to error) Take a repository that has a weak key warning, upgrade apt and check that it is an error 2. (still valid) Check that the main Ubuntu repositories and/or resigned PPAs work correctly. [Where problems could occur] apt will start to fail updates of repositories with weak signing keys, but it will have warned users about that before. Given that it is still early in the cycle, and we only enable updates for 24.04.1, this seems the right tradeoff for future security. ** Summary changed: - Promote weak key warnings to errors + APT 2.8.0: Promote weak key warnings to errors ** Also affects: apt (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Description changed:
[Touch-packages] [Bug 1951491] Re: Can't run snaps: .slice/session-1.scope is not a snap cgroup
Thanks for the bug report, unfortunately this has become quite convoluted and I've identified at least 3 different strands of discussion in here that are not related. Some stuff, like "runuser" in a cron job is clearly never going to work, but I don't know how the other two instances - sessions without session busses and issues with VNC connections are affected. I'd advise filing clear succinct reproducible issues for those cases, but I don't think there's much that can be done with this bug anymore. ** Changed in: x2goserver (Ubuntu) Status: Confirmed => Incomplete ** Changed in: snapd (Ubuntu) Status: Confirmed => Incomplete -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to systemd in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1951491 Title: Can't run snaps: .slice/session-1.scope is not a snap cgroup Status in X2Go: New Status in Xpra Terminal Server: New Status in snapd package in Ubuntu: Incomplete Status in systemd package in Ubuntu: Incomplete Status in x2goserver package in Ubuntu: Incomplete Status in snapd package in Debian: New Status in snapd package in Fedora: New Bug description: I just upgraded from hirsute to impish using do-release-upgrade. On the upgraded system, I can't run either firefox or chromium (both of which worked fine under hirsute). Both fail with: /user.slice/user-NNN.slice/session-1.scope is not a snap cgroup where NNN is my uid With firefox, I was able to fix the problem with: snap remove --purge firefox apt purge firefox apt install firefox Now firefox works. But I tried the same thing substituting chromium- browser for firefox, and it didn't help: chromium fails with the same error message. I guess there must be something left over from the hirsute version of snapd that isn't getting noticed or cleared by the impish version? Someone suggested this might be related to bug 1850667, but that bug is marked fixed as of a couple months ago, and I just did this upgrade today. Also, it doesn't mention the error message I'm seeing. ProblemType: Bug DistroRelease: Ubuntu 21.10 Package: snapd 2.53+21.10ubuntu1 ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 5.13.0-21.21-generic 5.13.18 Uname: Linux 5.13.0-21-generic x86_64 ApportVersion: 2.20.11-0ubuntu71 Architecture: amd64 CasperMD5CheckResult: unknown Date: Thu Nov 18 18:12:45 2021 InstallationDate: Installed on 2020-04-29 (568 days ago) InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 20.04 LTS "Focal Fossa" - Release amd64 (20200423) SourcePackage: snapd UpgradeStatus: Upgraded to impish on 2021-11-18 (0 days ago) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/x2go/+bug/1951491/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 1988819] Re: When apt keeps back packages due to phased updates, it should list them separately
Geekley I personally agree and would go a lot further and hide even most dependencies (you don't really care which libraries you are installing, just about choices made, e.g. if there's an a | b dependency it should tell you that it picked a). So if you want to think about it that terse mode would end up looking something like: Installing 5 specified packages, 10 upgrades and 30 new dependencies: - Choosing banana to satisfy foo Depends: banana | apple Removing 30 packages: - package1 ... At the moment there is no option in between full output and no output, though, and there is opposition to adding more output modes upstream. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1988819 Title: When apt keeps back packages due to phased updates, it should list them separately Status in apt package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Bug description: After phased updates have been introduced, it may happen that apt upgrade shows packages as upgradable but ends up not upgrading them. In this case the packages are indicated as being "kept back". Unfortunately, the feedback provided about this to the user is not very informative. The user sees the packages being kept back and thinks something is going wrong on the system. When packages are kept back because of phased updates, apt should say so e.g., it should say that the upgrade is delayed. Incidentally note that aptitude does not respect phased updates. ProblemType: Bug DistroRelease: Ubuntu 22.04 Package: apt 2.4.7 ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 5.15.0-47.51-generic 5.15.46 Uname: Linux 5.15.0-47-generic x86_64 ApportVersion: 2.20.11-0ubuntu82.1 Architecture: amd64 CasperMD5CheckResult: unknown CurrentDesktop: KDE Date: Tue Sep 6 10:05:14 2022 EcryptfsInUse: Yes InstallationDate: Installed on 2020-02-16 (933 days ago) InstallationMedia: Kubuntu 19.10 "Eoan Ermine" - Release amd64 (20191017) SourcePackage: apt UpgradeStatus: Upgraded to jammy on 2022-06-03 (94 days ago) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/1988819/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2059853] Re: apt amd64 2.7.14 is missing on Ubuntu Noble?
You may have heard about the xz-utils backdoor, compromised binaries have been removed and replaced with older ones, and a partial amd64 rebuild is ongoing. ** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu) Status: New => Invalid -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2059853 Title: apt amd64 2.7.14 is missing on Ubuntu Noble? Status in apt package in Ubuntu: Invalid Bug description: I can not find the apt amd64 version 2.7.14 on Ubuntu Noble. It seems apt only exists for non-amd64 architecture: https://packages.ubuntu.com/search?suite=noble=apt noble (admin): commandline package manager 2.7.14: arm64 armhf i386 ppc64el riscv64 s390x I can not find any docs stating this. Is it a bug or ? Thank you very much. Steven To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/2059853/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2057792] Re: Some Games are crashing linked to a vm_max_map_count too low
Uploaded procps with the file; leaving gamemode task open because maybe dynamic enhancements there still make some sense in 24.10 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to procps in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2057792 Title: Some Games are crashing linked to a vm_max_map_count too low Status in gamemode package in Ubuntu: Confirmed Status in linux package in Ubuntu: Won't Fix Status in procps package in Ubuntu: Fix Committed Bug description: Hello there, I submit this request to improve the gaming experience in ubuntu for all users. Today, Hogwarts Legacy, Star Citizen and few more games are crashing or just not starting because the vm_max_map_count is locked at 65530. If we change this value to a value > 20, all games are working well and there is no bug linked to maps. Some others distribution like Fedora or Pop OS, have already made the change few month before. It's time to Ubuntu to makes the change also. Thanks in advance for applying this request. How to make this change : One file to modify : /etc/sysctl.conf Add this line : vm.max_map_count=2147483642 Save Reboot and enjoy Best Regards Vinceff To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gamemode/+bug/2057792/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2057792] Re: Some Games are crashing linked to a vm_max_map_count too low
I'm agreeing with desktop in following Fedora to bump to 1048576, the precedence makes this safe, and this I consider this a bug fix for crashing software and not a feature request. ** Changed in: procps (Ubuntu) Status: Confirmed => Triaged ** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu) Status: Confirmed => Won't Fix ** Changed in: procps (Ubuntu) Status: Triaged => In Progress ** Changed in: procps (Ubuntu) Status: In Progress => Fix Committed ** No longer affects: ubuntu -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to procps in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2057792 Title: Some Games are crashing linked to a vm_max_map_count too low Status in gamemode package in Ubuntu: Confirmed Status in linux package in Ubuntu: Won't Fix Status in procps package in Ubuntu: Fix Committed Bug description: Hello there, I submit this request to improve the gaming experience in ubuntu for all users. Today, Hogwarts Legacy, Star Citizen and few more games are crashing or just not starting because the vm_max_map_count is locked at 65530. If we change this value to a value > 20, all games are working well and there is no bug linked to maps. Some others distribution like Fedora or Pop OS, have already made the change few month before. It's time to Ubuntu to makes the change also. Thanks in advance for applying this request. How to make this change : One file to modify : /etc/sysctl.conf Add this line : vm.max_map_count=2147483642 Save Reboot and enjoy Best Regards Vinceff To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gamemode/+bug/2057792/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2057792] Re: Some Games are crashing linked to a vm_max_map_count too low
Subscribing Canonical desktop team to get their input. Basically the ask is to ship this file: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/systemd/blob/f39/f/10-map-count.conf I believe if we do it should be shipped in procps; or possibly, gamemode should set that option? ** Also affects: procps (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Also affects: gamemode (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to procps in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2057792 Title: Some Games are crashing linked to a vm_max_map_count too low Status in Ubuntu: Confirmed Status in gamemode package in Ubuntu: New Status in linux package in Ubuntu: Confirmed Status in procps package in Ubuntu: New Bug description: Hello there, I submit this request to improve the gaming experience in ubuntu for all users. Today, Hogwarts Legacy, Star Citizen and few more games are crashing or just not starting because the vm_max_map_count is locked at 65530. If we change this value to a value > 20, all games are working well and there is no bug linked to maps. Some others distribution like Fedora or Pop OS, have already made the change few month before. It's time to Ubuntu to makes the change also. Thanks in advance for applying this request. How to make this change : One file to modify : /etc/sysctl.conf Add this line : vm.max_map_count=2147483642 Save Reboot and enjoy Best Regards Vinceff To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/2057792/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2051181] Re: apt cannot upgrade phased updates if the current security version is same as updates
jammy is green too now ** Tags removed: verification-needed verification-needed-jammy ** Tags added: verification-done verification-done-jammy -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2051181 Title: apt cannot upgrade phased updates if the current security version is same as updates Status in apt package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in apt source package in Jammy: Fix Committed Status in apt source package in Mantic: Fix Committed Status in apt source package in Noble: Fix Released Bug description: [Impact] A package that has the same version in -security and -updates, with the latter having a Phased-Update-Percentage set is subject to phasing which is not expected by the security team. [Test plan] An automatic test case has been added to apt's comprehensive integration test suite that simulates the problem. Passing of the autopkgtests is a successful test. [Where problems could occur] The fix in question changes the behavior, some people may have relied on that, but also this should not have happened server side (normally security updates do not receive a value but the real one in this case went a different route). Otherwise the fix is fairly contained, it removes a single OtherVer++ increment which made it go one version below the current version, so we do not expect any problems; setting aside the usual regression potential from bugs in the compiler and so on. [Original bug report] When I finished installation with Jammy 22.04.3, I noticed that nvidia-driver-535 cannot be upgrade by either `apt upgrade` nor `apt dist-upgrade`. Below is the log of apt upgrade: ubuntu@ubuntu:~$ sudo apt -o Debug::pkgProblemResolver=1 upgrade --dry-run [2/1878] Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done Reading state information... Done Entering ResolveByKeep 10% Dependencies are not satisfied for nvidia-driver-535:amd64 < 535.129.03-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 | 535.154.05-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 @ii pumH NPb Ib > Package nvidia-driver-535:amd64 nvidia-driver-535:amd64 Depends on nvidia-dkms-535:amd64 < none | 535.154.05-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 @un umH > (<= 535.129.03-1) Keeping Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 due to Depends Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1028.28+2 @ii umH Ib > Keeping package linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1028.28+2 @ii umH Ib > Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 Depends on linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 -> 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umU Ib > (= 6.1.0-1027.27) Keeping Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 due to Depends Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1028-oem:amd64 < none -> 6.1.0-1028.28+2 @un uN Ib > Keeping package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1028-oem:amd64 Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Keeping package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 Depends on linux-signatures-nvidia-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 -> 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umU > (= 6.1.0-1027.27) Keeping Package linux-signatures-nvidia-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 due to Depends Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 Depends on linux-objects-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 -> 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umU > (= 6.1.0-1027.27) Keeping Package linux-objects-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 due to Depends https://pastebin.canonical.com/p/7frwTKZG6D/ To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/2051181/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help :
[Touch-packages] [Bug 1995790] Re: regression: ?garbage does not work correctly in install commands
jammy is green too now ** Tags removed: verification-needed-jammy ** Tags added: verification-done-jammy ** Tags removed: verification-needed ** Tags added: verification-done -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1995790 Title: regression: ?garbage does not work correctly in install commands Status in apt package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in apt source package in Jammy: Fix Committed Status in apt source package in Lunar: Won't Fix Status in apt source package in Mantic: Fix Committed Status in apt source package in Noble: Fix Released Bug description: [Impact] The '?garbage' pattern doesn't work with install/remove commands which is confusing, and the fix for it is trivial. [Test plan] Successful autopkgtest. The comprehensive test suite run as an autopkgtest has been updated in test/integration/test-apt-get-autoremove to test for the correct behavior of '?garbage' with install and remove. [Where problems could occur] You can see we had to tweak the test suite in a bunch of places because it relies on exact debug output format and because we now call "markandsweep" there's additional mark flags in the debug output. It's unlikely that this is a problem for others. We have not seen regressions in noble in the past 2 weeks or noble- proposed since 2023-11-23 (it was stuck for other reasons there), hence other places the code change may affect have been thoroughly exercised in the builders and autopkgtest runners. [Original bug report] The awesome apt has a some wonderful tips on their EXAMPLES section (printed below). The choice of name to "garbage" might not have been the best but the function is extremely useful. $ man apt-patterns | sed '/EXAMPLES/,/^[^ ]/!d;/^[^ ]/d' apt remove ?garbage Remove all packages that are automatically installed and no longer needed - same as apt autoremove apt purge ?config-files Purge all packages that only have configuration files left apt list '~i !~M (~slibs|~sperl|~spython)' List all manually-installed packages in sections matching libs, perl, or python. Lets mark a package as automatically installed, and use the examples. $ sudo apt-mark auto shotwell shotwell set to automatically installed. $ sudo apt remove ?garbage Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done Reading state information... Done The following packages were automatically installed and are no longer required: libraw20 shotwell shotwell-common Use 'sudo apt autoremove' to remove them. 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded. $ sudo apt autoremove Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done Reading state information... Done The following packages will be REMOVED: libraw20 shotwell shotwell-common 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 3 to remove and 0 not upgraded. After this operation, 9.806 kB disk space will be freed. Do you want to continue? [Y/n] N Abort. Apt-patterns works as it should everywhere else, as far as I can see, it works wonders with ie `apt list '~g|~c'` and many other applications. I used `apt purge '~g|~c'` successfully in Ubuntu 20.04 for years, so I feel this is a regression. ProblemType: Bug DistroRelease: Ubuntu 22.04 Package: apt 2.4.8 ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 5.15.0-52.58-generic 5.15.60 Uname: Linux 5.15.0-52-generic x86_64 NonfreeKernelModules: zfs zunicode zavl icp zcommon znvpair ApportVersion: 2.20.11-0ubuntu82.1 Architecture: amd64 CasperMD5CheckResult: unknown CurrentDesktop: ubuntu:GNOME Date: Sun Nov 6 10:57:52 2022 SourcePackage: apt UpgradeStatus: Upgraded to jammy on 2022-03-26 (224 days ago) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/1995790/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2053228] Re: software-properties-gtk does not start
** Changed in: software-properties (Ubuntu)
Status: Triaged => Fix Committed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to software-properties in
Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2053228
Title:
software-properties-gtk does not start
Status in software-properties package in Ubuntu:
Fix Committed
Bug description:
On a new install with the new format sources.list software-properties-gtk
does not start:
corrado@corrado-n4-nn-0215:~$ software-properties-gtk
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/bin/software-properties-gtk", line 100, in
app = SoftwarePropertiesGtk(datadir=options.data_dir, options=options,
file=file)
^^^
File
"/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/softwareproperties/gtk/SoftwarePropertiesGtk.py",
line 163, in __init__
SoftwareProperties.__init__(self, options=options, datadir=datadir,
File
"/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/softwareproperties/SoftwareProperties.py", line
109, in __init__
self.backup_sourceslist()
File
"/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/softwareproperties/SoftwareProperties.py", line
437, in backup_sourceslist
source_bkp = SourceEntry(line=source.line,file=source.file)
^^
File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/aptsources/sourceslist.py", line 509,
in __init__
raise ValueError("Classic SourceEntry cannot be written to .sources file")
ValueError: Classic SourceEntry cannot be written to .sources file
corrado@corrado-n4-nn-0215:~$
ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 24.04
Package: software-properties-gtk 0.99.42
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 6.6.0-14.14-generic 6.6.3
Uname: Linux 6.6.0-14-generic x86_64
ApportVersion: 2.27.0-0ubuntu6
Architecture: amd64
CasperMD5CheckResult: pass
CurrentDesktop: ubuntu:GNOME
Date: Thu Feb 15 10:07:43 2024
InstallationDate: Installed on 2024-02-15 (0 days ago)
InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 24.04 LTS "Noble Numbat" - Daily amd64 (20240215)
PackageArchitecture: all
ProcEnviron:
LANG=en_US.UTF-8
PATH=(custom, no user)
SHELL=/bin/bash
TERM=xterm-256color
XDG_RUNTIME_DIR=
SourcePackage: software-properties
UpgradeStatus: No upgrade log present (probably fresh install)
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/software-properties/+bug/2053228/+subscriptions
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 1995790] Re: regression: ?garbage does not work correctly in install commands
The regressions on mantic have cleared up and the tests of apt have passed so this is verified there. Still clearing out a regression from update-manager:i386 on jammy- ** Tags removed: verification-needed-mantic ** Tags added: verification-done-mantic -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1995790 Title: regression: ?garbage does not work correctly in install commands Status in apt package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in apt source package in Jammy: Fix Committed Status in apt source package in Lunar: Won't Fix Status in apt source package in Mantic: Fix Committed Status in apt source package in Noble: Fix Released Bug description: [Impact] The '?garbage' pattern doesn't work with install/remove commands which is confusing, and the fix for it is trivial. [Test plan] Successful autopkgtest. The comprehensive test suite run as an autopkgtest has been updated in test/integration/test-apt-get-autoremove to test for the correct behavior of '?garbage' with install and remove. [Where problems could occur] You can see we had to tweak the test suite in a bunch of places because it relies on exact debug output format and because we now call "markandsweep" there's additional mark flags in the debug output. It's unlikely that this is a problem for others. We have not seen regressions in noble in the past 2 weeks or noble- proposed since 2023-11-23 (it was stuck for other reasons there), hence other places the code change may affect have been thoroughly exercised in the builders and autopkgtest runners. [Original bug report] The awesome apt has a some wonderful tips on their EXAMPLES section (printed below). The choice of name to "garbage" might not have been the best but the function is extremely useful. $ man apt-patterns | sed '/EXAMPLES/,/^[^ ]/!d;/^[^ ]/d' apt remove ?garbage Remove all packages that are automatically installed and no longer needed - same as apt autoremove apt purge ?config-files Purge all packages that only have configuration files left apt list '~i !~M (~slibs|~sperl|~spython)' List all manually-installed packages in sections matching libs, perl, or python. Lets mark a package as automatically installed, and use the examples. $ sudo apt-mark auto shotwell shotwell set to automatically installed. $ sudo apt remove ?garbage Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done Reading state information... Done The following packages were automatically installed and are no longer required: libraw20 shotwell shotwell-common Use 'sudo apt autoremove' to remove them. 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded. $ sudo apt autoremove Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done Reading state information... Done The following packages will be REMOVED: libraw20 shotwell shotwell-common 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 3 to remove and 0 not upgraded. After this operation, 9.806 kB disk space will be freed. Do you want to continue? [Y/n] N Abort. Apt-patterns works as it should everywhere else, as far as I can see, it works wonders with ie `apt list '~g|~c'` and many other applications. I used `apt purge '~g|~c'` successfully in Ubuntu 20.04 for years, so I feel this is a regression. ProblemType: Bug DistroRelease: Ubuntu 22.04 Package: apt 2.4.8 ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 5.15.0-52.58-generic 5.15.60 Uname: Linux 5.15.0-52-generic x86_64 NonfreeKernelModules: zfs zunicode zavl icp zcommon znvpair ApportVersion: 2.20.11-0ubuntu82.1 Architecture: amd64 CasperMD5CheckResult: unknown CurrentDesktop: ubuntu:GNOME Date: Sun Nov 6 10:57:52 2022 SourcePackage: apt UpgradeStatus: Upgraded to jammy on 2022-03-26 (224 days ago) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/1995790/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2051181] Re: apt cannot upgrade phased updates if the current security version is same as updates
The regressions on mantic have cleared up and the tests of apt have passed so this is verified there. Still clearing out a regression from update-manager:i386 on jammy- ** Tags removed: verification-needed-mantic ** Tags added: verification-done-mantic -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2051181 Title: apt cannot upgrade phased updates if the current security version is same as updates Status in apt package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in apt source package in Jammy: Fix Committed Status in apt source package in Mantic: Fix Committed Status in apt source package in Noble: Fix Released Bug description: [Impact] A package that has the same version in -security and -updates, with the latter having a Phased-Update-Percentage set is subject to phasing which is not expected by the security team. [Test plan] An automatic test case has been added to apt's comprehensive integration test suite that simulates the problem. Passing of the autopkgtests is a successful test. [Where problems could occur] The fix in question changes the behavior, some people may have relied on that, but also this should not have happened server side (normally security updates do not receive a value but the real one in this case went a different route). Otherwise the fix is fairly contained, it removes a single OtherVer++ increment which made it go one version below the current version, so we do not expect any problems; setting aside the usual regression potential from bugs in the compiler and so on. [Original bug report] When I finished installation with Jammy 22.04.3, I noticed that nvidia-driver-535 cannot be upgrade by either `apt upgrade` nor `apt dist-upgrade`. Below is the log of apt upgrade: ubuntu@ubuntu:~$ sudo apt -o Debug::pkgProblemResolver=1 upgrade --dry-run [2/1878] Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done Reading state information... Done Entering ResolveByKeep 10% Dependencies are not satisfied for nvidia-driver-535:amd64 < 535.129.03-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 | 535.154.05-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 @ii pumH NPb Ib > Package nvidia-driver-535:amd64 nvidia-driver-535:amd64 Depends on nvidia-dkms-535:amd64 < none | 535.154.05-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 @un umH > (<= 535.129.03-1) Keeping Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 due to Depends Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1028.28+2 @ii umH Ib > Keeping package linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1028.28+2 @ii umH Ib > Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 Depends on linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 -> 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umU Ib > (= 6.1.0-1027.27) Keeping Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 due to Depends Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1028-oem:amd64 < none -> 6.1.0-1028.28+2 @un uN Ib > Keeping package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1028-oem:amd64 Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Keeping package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 Depends on linux-signatures-nvidia-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 -> 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umU > (= 6.1.0-1027.27) Keeping Package linux-signatures-nvidia-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 due to Depends Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 Depends on linux-objects-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 -> 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umU > (= 6.1.0-1027.27) Keeping Package linux-objects-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 due to Depends https://pastebin.canonical.com/p/7frwTKZG6D/ To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/2051181/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to :
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2054716] Re: package polkitd 124-1 failed to install/upgrade: installed polkitd package post-installation script subprocess returned error exit status 1
** Tags removed: rls-nn-incoming -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to systemd in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054716 Title: package polkitd 124-1 failed to install/upgrade: installed polkitd package post-installation script subprocess returned error exit status 1 Status in policykit-1 package in Ubuntu: Confirmed Status in systemd package in Ubuntu: Confirmed Bug description: I was working on recreating bug 2054319 and did so by modifying my /etc/apt/sources.list file from jammy to noble and installing polkit and all its dependencies. bdmurray@clean-jammy-amd64:~$ sudo apt-get install gir1.2-polkit-1.0 libpolkit-agent-1-0:amd64 libpolkit-gobject-1-0:amd64 pkexec policykit-1 polkitd Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done Reading state information... Done The following packages were automatically installed and are no longer required: linux-headers-6.2.0-26-generic linux-headers-6.2.0-36-generic linux-headers-6.5.0-14-generic linux-hwe-6.2-headers-6.2.0-26 linux-hwe-6.2-headers-6.2.0-36 linux-hwe-6.5-headers-6.5.0-14 linux-image-6.2.0-26-generic linux-image-6.2.0-36-generic linux-image-6.5.0-14-generic linux-modules-6.2.0-26-generic linux-modules-6.2.0-36-generic linux-modules-6.5.0-14-generic linux-modules-extra-6.2.0-26-generic linux-modules-extra-6.2.0-36-generic linux-modules-extra-6.5.0-14-generic Use 'sudo apt autoremove' to remove them. The following additional packages will be installed: libc-bin libc-dev-bin libc-devtools libc6 libc6-dbg libc6-dev libduktape207 libgcrypt20 libglib2.0-0 libglib2.0-bin libnss-systemd libpam-systemd libsystemd-shared libsystemd0 libudev1 libzstd1 locales systemd systemd-dev systemd-oomd systemd-resolved systemd-sysv systemd-timesyncd udev Suggested packages: glibc-doc rng-tools low-memory-monitor polkitd-pkla systemd-container systemd-homed systemd-userdbd systemd-boot libqrencode4 libtss2-rc0 Recommended packages: libnss-nis libnss-nisplus The following NEW packages will be installed: libduktape207 libsystemd-shared systemd-dev systemd-resolved The following packages will be upgraded: gir1.2-polkit-1.0 libc-bin libc-dev-bin libc-devtools libc6 libc6-dbg libc6-dev libgcrypt20 libglib2.0-0 libglib2.0-bin libnss-systemd libpam-systemd libpolkit-agent-1-0 libpolkit-gobject-1-0 libsystemd0 libudev1 libzstd1 locales pkexec policykit-1 polkitd systemd systemd-oomd systemd-sysv systemd-timesyncd udev 26 upgraded, 4 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1407 not upgraded. Need to get 34.9 MB of archives. ProblemType: Package DistroRelease: Ubuntu 22.04 Package: polkitd 124-1 ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 6.5.0-18.18~22.04.1-generic 6.5.8 Uname: Linux 6.5.0-18-generic x86_64 ApportVersion: 2.20.11-0ubuntu82.5 Architecture: amd64 CasperMD5CheckMismatches: ./boot/grub/grub.cfg CasperMD5CheckResult: fail Date: Thu Feb 22 08:46:48 2024 ErrorMessage: installed polkitd package post-installation script subprocess returned error exit status 1 InstallationDate: Installed on 2023-11-02 (112 days ago) InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 22.04.3 LTS "Jammy Jellyfish" - Release amd64 (20230807.2) Python3Details: /usr/bin/python3.10, Python 3.10.12, python3-minimal, 3.10.6-1~22.04 PythonDetails: N/A RebootRequiredPkgs: Error: path contained symlinks. RelatedPackageVersions: dpkg 1.21.1ubuntu2.2 apt 2.4.11 SourcePackage: policykit-1 Title: package polkitd 124-1 failed to install/upgrade: installed polkitd package post-installation script subprocess returned error exit status 1 UpgradeStatus: No upgrade log present (probably fresh install) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/policykit-1/+bug/2054716/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2038925] Re: Many hangs during apt full-upgrade
If it gets stuck maybe look at top to see if it spends CPU anywhere do do a ps faux or something to see the process tree. I wonder if it's a debconf frontend socket being stuck or something ** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu) Status: New => Incomplete -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2038925 Title: Many hangs during apt full-upgrade Status in apt package in Ubuntu: Incomplete Bug description: Since upgrading to Ubuntu 23.10, running "apt full-upgrade" has resulted in many hangs of up to a minute or so during the upgrade procedure. These seem to happen at random and unpredictable steps during the upgrade. Running it just now, it hung for around a minute on this line: Installing new version of config file /etc/lsb-release ... At around the same time, the following was logged to /var/log/syslog, which may or may not be related: 2023-10-10T06:38:33.162713-07:00 albatross hud-service[3499]: #033[31mvoid DBusMenuImporter::slotGetLayoutFinished(QDBusPendingCallWatcher*)#033[0m: "No such interface “com.canonical.dbusmenu” on object at path /org/ayatana/bamf/window/73400498" It then hung again for about a minute at: Setting up apport (2.27.0-0ubuntu5) ... but nothing was logged to syslog. These hangs did not happen on 23.04. I appreciate that this is all a bit vague, so am happy to do further debugging if someone can advise me what to do. I also appreciate that apt might not be the correct package to file this bug against - feel free to reassign it. ProblemType: Bug DistroRelease: Ubuntu 23.10 Package: apt 2.7.3 ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 6.5.0-7.7-generic 6.5.3 Uname: Linux 6.5.0-7-generic x86_64 ApportVersion: 2.27.0-0ubuntu5 Architecture: amd64 CasperMD5CheckResult: unknown CurrentDesktop: Unity:Unity7:ubuntu Date: Tue Oct 10 06:41:34 2023 InstallationDate: Installed on 2020-07-14 (1183 days ago) InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 20.04 LTS "Focal Fossa" - Release amd64 (20200423) SourcePackage: apt UpgradeStatus: Upgraded to mantic on 2023-09-16 (24 days ago) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/2038925/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2047447] Re: No valid source.list found while upgrading from mantic to noble
The comment one is fixed in noble, I'm not sure what Xavier's ubuntu.sources is about though, there's probably subtle errors in there that get lost in the comment. So... Suffice it to say, this is a rather niche issue as 23.10 did not actually ship with ubuntu.sources, so it affects a few people who upgraded to it during the development cycle while that was on. I could look at backporting the fix in python-apt and I guess more importantly, the case-insensitive lookup. I don't think backporting this on its own makes a lot of sense given that this only affects early 23.10 testers, but the case-sensitiveness fix probably makes it worth it. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to python-apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2047447 Title: No valid source.list found while upgrading from mantic to noble Status in python-apt package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in ubuntu-release-upgrader package in Ubuntu: Confirmed Status in python-apt source package in Mantic: New Status in ubuntu-release-upgrader source package in Mantic: New Bug description: Checking package manager Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done Reading state information... Done Hit http://fr.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu mantic InRelease Hit http://fr.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu mantic-updates InRelease Hit http://fr.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu mantic-security InRelease Hit http://fr.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu mantic-backports InRelease Hit https://packages.gitlab.com/gitlab/gitlab-ce/ubuntu lunar InRelease Fetched 0 B in 0s (0 B/s) Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done Reading state information... Done Checking for installed snaps Calculating snap size requirements Updating repository information No valid sources.list entry found While scanning your repository information no entry about mantic could be found. An upgrade might not succeed. Do you want to continue anyway? Continue [yN] To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python-apt/+bug/2047447/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2047447] Re: No valid source.list found while upgrading from mantic to noble
** Changed in: python-apt (Ubuntu) Status: New => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to python-apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2047447 Title: No valid source.list found while upgrading from mantic to noble Status in python-apt package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in ubuntu-release-upgrader package in Ubuntu: Confirmed Status in python-apt source package in Mantic: New Status in ubuntu-release-upgrader source package in Mantic: New Bug description: Checking package manager Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done Reading state information... Done Hit http://fr.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu mantic InRelease Hit http://fr.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu mantic-updates InRelease Hit http://fr.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu mantic-security InRelease Hit http://fr.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu mantic-backports InRelease Hit https://packages.gitlab.com/gitlab/gitlab-ce/ubuntu lunar InRelease Fetched 0 B in 0s (0 B/s) Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done Reading state information... Done Checking for installed snaps Calculating snap size requirements Updating repository information No valid sources.list entry found While scanning your repository information no entry about mantic could be found. An upgrade might not succeed. Do you want to continue anyway? Continue [yN] To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python-apt/+bug/2047447/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2055193] Re: [FFe] APT 24.04 crypto policy update
Sorry Łukasz, this has landed in 2.7.13 in proposed back in February,
with the caveat that it is a warning for now. This will essentially
close the bug and we should probably consider the FFe to be switching
that to an error once everything landed. Arguably some consider any of
that work a bug fix and not a feature :)
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Fix Committed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2055193
Title:
[FFe] APT 24.04 crypto policy update
Status in apt package in Ubuntu:
Fix Committed
Status in gnupg2 package in Ubuntu:
Fix Committed
Bug description:
I don't know if this will land before the feature freeze but I'm
filing this in any case:
Our goal for 24.04 is to reject 1024-bit RSA repository signing keys.
Work is ongoing in Launchpad to allow dual-signing PPAs and then
resign all PPAs with a 4096-bit key.
This needs the following changes:
1) The gnupg upstream commit for https://dev.gnupg.org/T6946 needs to be
backported. This is applying fine and in the package already, but the test
suite fails with issues that look weirdly unrelated.
2) APT needs to learn to pass the argument if supported
3) APT needs to learn to interpret the output
4) APT possibly may have to learn to issue warnings instead of errors for
weak keys and pass the URL to the gpgv method to allow 1024-bit RSA keys over
TLS connections, in case there are unforeseen issues with the PPA migration.
Signing key policy: We would like to adopt a signing key policy of
rsa>2048,ed25519,ed448
As a result we would like to reject
- RSA keys below 2048 bits
- DSA keys
- Unsafe ECC keys:
- NIST P-{256,384,521}
- Brainpool P-{256,384,512}
- secp256k1
Notes:
- DSA keys are not possible to use anymore due to the deprecation of SHA1
that happened years ago
- NIST and Brainpool and secp256k1 are not very popular,
https://safecurves.cr.yp.to/ lists all of them as unsafe. It is believed they
have backdoors. Some FIPS customers may prefer them over Ed25519 and Ed448 as
they have been approved longer, so it's possible fips support packages could
reenable them by setting the correct apt.conf setting in a snippet.
Timing wrt feature freeze and launchpad changes:
Launchpad changes won't be landing before feature freeze and it will
take some more weeks to resign the repositories, hence we need to do
uploads after FF to enable the error by default even if we ship the
functionality before it.
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/2055193/+subscriptions
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2053228] Re: software-properties-gtk does not start
While the patch makes the application run it also breaks the
functionality it's patching for deb822 sources by just ignoring them.
More work is needed and I do have it scheduled for this pulse
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to software-properties in
Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2053228
Title:
software-properties-gtk does not start
Status in software-properties package in Ubuntu:
Triaged
Bug description:
On a new install with the new format sources.list software-properties-gtk
does not start:
corrado@corrado-n4-nn-0215:~$ software-properties-gtk
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/bin/software-properties-gtk", line 100, in
app = SoftwarePropertiesGtk(datadir=options.data_dir, options=options,
file=file)
^^^
File
"/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/softwareproperties/gtk/SoftwarePropertiesGtk.py",
line 163, in __init__
SoftwareProperties.__init__(self, options=options, datadir=datadir,
File
"/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/softwareproperties/SoftwareProperties.py", line
109, in __init__
self.backup_sourceslist()
File
"/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/softwareproperties/SoftwareProperties.py", line
437, in backup_sourceslist
source_bkp = SourceEntry(line=source.line,file=source.file)
^^
File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/aptsources/sourceslist.py", line 509,
in __init__
raise ValueError("Classic SourceEntry cannot be written to .sources file")
ValueError: Classic SourceEntry cannot be written to .sources file
corrado@corrado-n4-nn-0215:~$
ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 24.04
Package: software-properties-gtk 0.99.42
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 6.6.0-14.14-generic 6.6.3
Uname: Linux 6.6.0-14-generic x86_64
ApportVersion: 2.27.0-0ubuntu6
Architecture: amd64
CasperMD5CheckResult: pass
CurrentDesktop: ubuntu:GNOME
Date: Thu Feb 15 10:07:43 2024
InstallationDate: Installed on 2024-02-15 (0 days ago)
InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 24.04 LTS "Noble Numbat" - Daily amd64 (20240215)
PackageArchitecture: all
ProcEnviron:
LANG=en_US.UTF-8
PATH=(custom, no user)
SHELL=/bin/bash
TERM=xterm-256color
XDG_RUNTIME_DIR=
SourcePackage: software-properties
UpgradeStatus: No upgrade log present (probably fresh install)
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/software-properties/+bug/2053228/+subscriptions
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2053165] Re: [noble] Version 2.7.5 causes software-properties to crash
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 2053228 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2053228
Please do not delete files, certainly not ubuntu.sources, or you will no
longer get updates.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to python-apt in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2053165
Title:
[noble] Version 2.7.5 causes software-properties to crash
Status in python-apt package in Ubuntu:
Confirmed
Bug description:
Hi,
Only since recent 2.7.5 update along with 0.99.42 for software-properties.
Crash on start-up.
$ software-properties-gtk
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/bin/software-properties-gtk", line 100, in
app = SoftwarePropertiesGtk(datadir=options.data_dir, options=options,
file=file)
^^^
File
"/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/softwareproperties/gtk/SoftwarePropertiesGtk.py",
line 163, in __init__
SoftwareProperties.__init__(self, options=options, datadir=datadir,
File
"/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/softwareproperties/SoftwareProperties.py", line
109, in __init__
self.backup_sourceslist()
File
"/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/softwareproperties/SoftwareProperties.py", line
437, in backup_sourceslist
source_bkp = SourceEntry(line=source.line,file=source.file)
^^
File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/aptsources/sourceslist.py", line 509,
in __init__
raise ValueError("Classic SourceEntry cannot be written to .sources file")
ValueError: Classic SourceEntry cannot be written to .sources file
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python-apt/+bug/2053165/+subscriptions
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 1885646] Re: RM ring FTBFS
** Tags removed: update-excuse -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to nettle in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1885646 Title: RM ring FTBFS Status in nettle package in Ubuntu: Incomplete Status in ring package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in ring package in Debian: Fix Released Bug description: Please remove ring 20190215.1.f152c98~ds1-1build4 groovy-proposed ring 20190215.1.f152c98~ds1-1build2 groovy-release FTBFS, RC-buggy, removed from testing To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nettle/+bug/1885646/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2055717] Re: Acquire::http::proxy ignored / used inconsistently?
I mean that's good to know that systemd does not load system-wide environment variables but it's their design choice and not a bug in apt (or systemd). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2055717 Title: Acquire::http::proxy ignored / used inconsistently? Status in apt package in Ubuntu: Invalid Bug description: Problem description I have a client (A) and a freight server (B) serving apt packages on the same network. I also have a proxy server (C), which the client uses to talk to "the internet". When I run `sudo apt update`, my client talks to the freight server directly, without contacting the proxy. However, when `apt.daily` runs, the client contacts the proxy, which then connects to the freight server. Expected behavior Although updates work in both cases, the current behavior is inconsistent. The proxy should be used in both cases or in neither case. Setup details I use Ubuntu 22.04.4 with apt 2.4.11 (amd64). /etc/apt/sources.list.d/freight.list contains the local freight server. /etc/apt/sources.list lists the official Ubuntu repositories. /etc/apt/apt.config.d/95proxy contains one line `Acquire::http::proxy "http://my.proxy:8080/"`. Omitting the proxy config (`Acquire::http::proxy "false"`) lets the client contact the freight server directly during `apt.daily`, but updating the official repositories fails. Having the proxy properly configured,`apt.daily` succeeds but with the described inconsistent behavior. Note: I am aware that proxy exceptions can be configured using the "DIRECT" keyword. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/2055717/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2054925] Re: Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7
Apologies, I saw the same issue locally fixed it but must have forgotten to build a new .dsc:/ -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to base-files in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054925 Title: Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7 Status in base-files package in Ubuntu: Won't Fix Status in debootstrap package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in debootstrap source package in Focal: Fix Committed Status in debootstrap source package in Jammy: Fix Released Status in base-files source package in Mantic: New Status in debootstrap source package in Mantic: Fix Released Bug description: [Impact] The last couple of days, I have been unable to run a successful debootstrap for Noble Numbat. Apparently this is caused by the addition of symlinks (/bin, /lib, /lib64 and /sbin) in base-files 13ubuntu7. According to debootstrap.log, it fails to extract said symlinks because they already exist at that point. This can be reproduced on build hosts running Jammy Jellyfish against any up-to-date Ubuntu public archive mirror as of today. # lsb_release -a No LSB modules are available. Distributor ID: Ubuntu Description: Ubuntu 22.04.4 LTS Release: 22.04 Codename: jammy # apt-cache policy debootstrap debootstrap: Installed: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 Candidate: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 Version table: *** 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 500 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main amd64 Packages 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main i386 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status 1.0.126+nmu1 500 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main amd64 Packages 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main i386 Packages Attached shell output of two runs of debootstrap. First run uses mirror archive.ubuntu.com (which as of this report serves base-files version 13ubuntu7), and second run uses a local custom mirror (which serves base-files 13ubuntu6). First run fails, second run succeeds. [Test plan] Successfully for each of focal, jammy, mantic, noble - debootstrap - mk-sbuild - pbuilder-dist $release create - ubuntu-image, if we can pull debootstrap from proposed for this as well as - debootstrap noble --merged-usr [Where problems could occur] We do not anticipate any regressions as we replace the previous *) case for usrmerge for post-hirsute with a new jammy|kinetic|lunar|mantic one, and the new solution will only impact noble and onward. That said, this is a different approach than mantic and newer take, and a different approach than Debian takes, where they moved to merging post-extraction, even in stable releases. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/base-files/+bug/2054925/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2055889] Re: E:can not open /var/lib/apt/lists/ppa.launchpadcontent.net_cappelikan_ppa_ubuntu_dists_jammy_InRelease - fopen (13: Permission denied), E:The package lists or status
There are occasionally permission issues in APT like this, but sadly we never managed to reproduce them so we never have been able to figure out where it skips setting the right permission. If you can find a clean reproducer we can investigate further, but otherwise it's sadly not actionable. ** Package changed: update-manager (Ubuntu) => apt (Ubuntu) ** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu) Status: New => Incomplete -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2055889 Title: E:can not open /var/lib/apt/lists/ppa.launchpadcontent.net_cappelikan_ppa_ubuntu_dists_jammy_InRelease - fopen (13: Permission denied), E:The package lists or status file could not be parsed or opened. Status in apt package in Ubuntu: Incomplete Bug description: E:can not open /var/lib/apt/lists/ppa.launchpadcontent.net_cappelikan_ppa_ubuntu_dists_jammy_InRelease - fopen (13: Permission denied), E:The package lists or status file could not be parsed or opened. ProblemType: Bug DistroRelease: Ubuntu 22.04 Package: update-manager 1:22.04.18 Uname: Linux 5.15.146-0515146-generic x86_64 NonfreeKernelModules: nvidia_modeset nvidia ApportVersion: 2.20.11-0ubuntu82.5 Aptdaemon: Architecture: amd64 CasperMD5CheckResult: unknown CurrentDesktop: ubuntu:GNOME Date: Mon Mar 4 21:24:05 2024 DpkgHistoryLog.txt: Start-Date: 2024-03-01 19:49:25 Commandline: aptdaemon role='role-commit-packages' sender=':1.140' Upgrade: tzdata:amd64 (2023d-0ubuntu0.22.04, 2024a-0ubuntu0.22.04) End-Date: 2024-03-01 19:49:27 InstallationDate: Installed on 2021-02-15 (1113 days ago) InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 20.04.2.0 LTS "Focal Fossa" - Release amd64 (20210209.1) PackageArchitecture: all SourcePackage: update-manager UpgradeStatus: No upgrade log present (probably fresh install) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/2055889/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2055717] Re: Acquire::http::proxy ignored / used inconsistently?
Hi there, the bug tracker is not the right place for user support. APT does not suddenly pick different proxies when running as a service. It does respect your http_proxy and no_proxy variables. Please note that while http_proxy does not override Acquire::http::proxy, no_proxy does. It sounds likely that when you run update manually, you have your freight server in the no_proxy variable. You have plenty of options to configure this more reliably, such as 1) configure Acquire::http::proxy::archive.ubuntu.com to only proxy for archive.ubuntu.com (repeat for all hosts you want proxy) 2) configure Acquire::http::proxy to your proxy and configuring Acquire::http::proxy::freightserverhostname "DIRECT" 3) configure Acquire::http::proxy (or http_proxy) and set no_proxy in /etc/environment(.d) ** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu) Status: New => Invalid -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2055717 Title: Acquire::http::proxy ignored / used inconsistently? Status in apt package in Ubuntu: Invalid Bug description: Problem description I have a client (A) and a freight server (B) serving apt packages on the same network. I also have a proxy server (C), which the client uses to talk to "the internet". When I run `sudo apt update`, my client talks to the freight server directly, without contacting the proxy. However, when `apt.daily` runs, the client contacts the proxy, which then connects to the freight server. Expected behavior Although updates work in both cases, the current behavior is inconsistent. The proxy should be used in both cases or in neither case. Setup details I use Ubuntu 22.04.4 with apt 2.4.11 (amd64). /etc/apt/sources.list.d/freight.list contains the local freight server. /etc/apt/sources.list lists the official Ubuntu repositories. /etc/apt/apt.config.d/95proxy contains one line `Acquire::http::proxy "http://my.proxy:8080/"`. Omitting the proxy config (`Acquire::http::proxy "false"`) lets the client contact the freight server directly during `apt.daily`, but updating the official repositories fails. Having the proxy properly configured,`apt.daily` succeeds but with the described inconsistent behavior. Note: I am aware that proxy exceptions can be configured using the "DIRECT" keyword. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/2055717/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2055711] Re: Cannot set APT::Periodic::Update-Package-Lists
You probably have /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/20auto-upgrades or another file later in the search order that overrides the setting, 20auto-upgrades is what unattended-upgrades configures. ** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu) Status: New => Invalid -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2055711 Title: Cannot set APT::Periodic::Update-Package-Lists Status in apt package in Ubuntu: Invalid Bug description: On Ubuntu 22.04.4 running apt 2.4.11 (amd64), I cannot set APT::Periodic::Update-Package-Lists. No matter which value I enter, it is always interpreted as '1'. Steps to reproduce: 1. Open /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/10periodic 2. Enter APT::Periodic::Update-Package-Lists "2" (or any other number, or "3h" or "always") 3. Save and exit 4. Run sudo apt-config shell UpdateInterval APT::Periodic::Update-Package-Lists 5. The console prints UpdateInterval='1' Changing other config options, like APT::Periodic::Download- Upgradable-Packages, works. Changing the order of the lines in 10periodic does not affect the result. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/2055711/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2054925] Re: Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7
On
root@known-seal:~# apt policy debootstrap
debootstrap:
Installed: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.7
Candidate: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.7
Version table:
*** 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.7 500
500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-proposed/main amd64 Packages
500 http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-proposed/main amd64 Packages
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 500
500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main amd64 Packages
1.0.126+nmu1 500
500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main amd64 Packages
I ran
- debootstrap {focal,jammy,mantic,noble}
- mk-sbuild {focal,jammy,mantic,noble}
- pbuilder-dist {focal,jammy,mantic,noble} create
and with the ubuntu-image run from upils I think we can call that
verified.
** Tags removed: rls-nn-incoming verification-needed verification-needed-jammy
** Tags added: verification-done verification-done-jammy
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to base-files in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054925
Title:
Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7
Status in base-files package in Ubuntu:
Won't Fix
Status in debootstrap package in Ubuntu:
Fix Released
Status in debootstrap source package in Focal:
In Progress
Status in debootstrap source package in Jammy:
Fix Committed
Status in base-files source package in Mantic:
New
Status in debootstrap source package in Mantic:
Fix Released
Bug description:
[Impact]
The last couple of days, I have been unable to run a successful debootstrap
for Noble Numbat.
Apparently this is caused by the addition of symlinks (/bin, /lib,
/lib64 and /sbin) in base-files 13ubuntu7. According to
debootstrap.log, it fails to extract said symlinks because they
already exist at that point.
This can be reproduced on build hosts running Jammy Jellyfish against
any up-to-date Ubuntu public archive mirror as of today.
# lsb_release -a
No LSB modules are available.
Distributor ID: Ubuntu
Description: Ubuntu 22.04.4 LTS
Release: 22.04
Codename: jammy
# apt-cache policy debootstrap
debootstrap:
Installed: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5
Candidate: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5
Version table:
*** 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 500
500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main amd64 Packages
500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main i386 Packages
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
1.0.126+nmu1 500
500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main amd64 Packages
500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main i386 Packages
Attached shell output of two runs of debootstrap. First run uses
mirror archive.ubuntu.com (which as of this report serves base-files
version 13ubuntu7), and second run uses a local custom mirror (which
serves base-files 13ubuntu6). First run fails, second run succeeds.
[Test plan]
Successfully for each of focal, jammy, mantic, noble
- debootstrap
- mk-sbuild
- pbuilder-dist $release create
- ubuntu-image, if we can pull debootstrap from proposed for this
as well as
- debootstrap noble --merged-usr
[Where problems could occur]
We do not anticipate any regressions as we replace the previous *) case for
usrmerge for post-hirsute with a new jammy|kinetic|lunar|mantic one, and the
new solution will only impact noble and onward.
That said, this is a different approach than mantic and newer take,
and a different approach than Debian takes, where they moved to
merging post-extraction, even in stable releases.
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/base-files/+bug/2054925/+subscriptions
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2054925] Re: Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7
The regression in debuerreotype is expected due to the included change from the previous SRU (LP: #1990856), packages are now extracted in a different order for the test case, hence some time stamps shifted. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to base-files in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054925 Title: Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7 Status in base-files package in Ubuntu: Won't Fix Status in debootstrap package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in debootstrap source package in Focal: In Progress Status in debootstrap source package in Jammy: Fix Committed Status in base-files source package in Mantic: New Status in debootstrap source package in Mantic: Fix Released Bug description: [Impact] The last couple of days, I have been unable to run a successful debootstrap for Noble Numbat. Apparently this is caused by the addition of symlinks (/bin, /lib, /lib64 and /sbin) in base-files 13ubuntu7. According to debootstrap.log, it fails to extract said symlinks because they already exist at that point. This can be reproduced on build hosts running Jammy Jellyfish against any up-to-date Ubuntu public archive mirror as of today. # lsb_release -a No LSB modules are available. Distributor ID: Ubuntu Description: Ubuntu 22.04.4 LTS Release: 22.04 Codename: jammy # apt-cache policy debootstrap debootstrap: Installed: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 Candidate: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 Version table: *** 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 500 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main amd64 Packages 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main i386 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status 1.0.126+nmu1 500 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main amd64 Packages 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main i386 Packages Attached shell output of two runs of debootstrap. First run uses mirror archive.ubuntu.com (which as of this report serves base-files version 13ubuntu7), and second run uses a local custom mirror (which serves base-files 13ubuntu6). First run fails, second run succeeds. [Test plan] Successfully for each of focal, jammy, mantic, noble - debootstrap - mk-sbuild - pbuilder-dist $release create - ubuntu-image, if we can pull debootstrap from proposed for this as well as - debootstrap noble --merged-usr [Where problems could occur] We do not anticipate any regressions as we replace the previous *) case for usrmerge for post-hirsute with a new jammy|kinetic|lunar|mantic one, and the new solution will only impact noble and onward. That said, this is a different approach than mantic and newer take, and a different approach than Debian takes, where they moved to merging post-extraction, even in stable releases. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/base-files/+bug/2054925/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2054319] Re: System installed from jammy point release iso cannot upgrade to noble
Deferring tracking to the other bugs ** Changed in: ubuntu-release-upgrader (Ubuntu) Status: New => Invalid ** Changed in: policykit-1 (Ubuntu) Status: New => Invalid ** Changed in: gnome-shell (Ubuntu) Status: New => Invalid ** Tags removed: rls-nn-incoming -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to policykit-1 in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054319 Title: System installed from jammy point release iso cannot upgrade to noble Status in gnome-shell package in Ubuntu: Invalid Status in policykit-1 package in Ubuntu: Invalid Status in ubuntu-release-upgrader package in Ubuntu: Invalid Bug description: We have different crashes being encountered. In our auto-upgrade- testing, we see gnome-shell crash, however, when testing locally, I didn't experience this. @hyask did experience the gnome-shell crash though. When running an upgrade from jammy to noble in a virsh vm, about halfway through the upgrade process my gui dies. I then ran the upgrade from a console, to which it revealed that just the gui dies - the upgrade process, for me, continues and then laterally fails. ProblemType: Bug DistroRelease: Ubuntu 24.04 Package: ubuntu-release-upgrader-core 1:24.04.7 ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 6.6.0-14.14-generic 6.6.3 Uname: Linux 6.6.0-14-generic x86_64 ApportVersion: 2.27.0-0ubuntu7 Architecture: amd64 CasperMD5CheckResult: unknown CrashDB: ubuntu CrashReports: 640:1000:124:1592041:2024-02-19 14:26:22.564354912 +:2024-02-19 14:51:56.318947066 +:/var/crash/_usr_libexec_tracker-extract-3.1000.crash 600:0:124:833806:2024-02-19 14:34:18.370597600 +:2024-02-19 14:34:19.370597600 +:/var/crash/polkitd.0.crash Date: Mon Feb 19 14:53:39 2024 InstallationDate: Installed on 2024-02-19 (0 days ago) InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 22.04.4 LTS "Jammy Jellyfish" - Release amd64 (20240216.1) PackageArchitecture: all SourcePackage: ubuntu-release-upgrader Symptom: ubuntu-release-upgrader UpgradeStatus: Upgraded to noble on 2024-02-19 (0 days ago) VarLogDistupgradeAptclonesystemstate.tar.gz: Error: command ['pkexec', 'cat', '/var/log/dist-upgrade/apt-clone_system_state.tar.gz'] failed with exit code 127: pkexec must be setuid root VarLogDistupgradeXorgFixuplog: INFO:root:/usr/bin/do-release-upgrade running INFO:root:No xorg.conf, exiting mtime.conffile..etc.init.d.apport: 2024-02-14T15:51:44 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-shell/+bug/2054319/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2019026] Re: systemd /tmp cleaning is suboptimal
I agree with Nick, regular cleaning *and* cleaning at /boot is best behavior. ** Tags removed: rls-nn-incoming ** Tags added: foundations-todo ** Also affects: systemd (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: Wishlist Status: Confirmed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to systemd in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2019026 Title: systemd /tmp cleaning is suboptimal Status in systemd package in Ubuntu: Triaged Status in systemd source package in Noble: Triaged Bug description: Historically on Debian and Ubuntu, before systemd, the default handling of /tmp was to periodically, and at boot, remove all files/directories older than 30 days; and leave other contents alone. With the move to systemd, the "default" (really, hard-coded in /usr/lib/tmpfiles.d/tmp.conf) is to not clean /tmp periodically, but at boot to remove all contents. This is suboptimal for two reasons. By cleaning /tmp *only* at boot, if a system makes heavy use of /tmp and has lots of inodes under it, possibly due to failures of some process to clean up after itself, at boot the system will be unavailable for an unnecessarily long time while these files are removed. By cleaning *all* files under /tmp, this makes a reboot an Event where in-progress files may be unnecessarily lost. While the FHS does not *guarantee* that files under /tmp will persist across boot (because /tmp may be a tmpfs), it also does not *require* that /tmp be cleared on boot. Although data stored in /tmp may be deleted in a site-specific manner, it is recommended that files and directories located in /tmp be deleted whenever the system is booted. FHS added this recommendation on the basis of historical precedent and common practice, but did not make it a requirement because system administration is not within the scope of this standard. I therefore believe the correct value for /usr/lib/tmpfiles.d/tmp.conf to restore past behavior is 'd /tmp 1777 root root 30d'. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/systemd/+bug/2019026/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2053228] Re: software-properties-gtk does not start
I must have forgotten to actually move this into the correct pulse to
fix it, so it's in the 2 weeks starting the week after next now.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to software-properties in
Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2053228
Title:
software-properties-gtk does not start
Status in software-properties package in Ubuntu:
Triaged
Bug description:
On a new install with the new format sources.list software-properties-gtk
does not start:
corrado@corrado-n4-nn-0215:~$ software-properties-gtk
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/bin/software-properties-gtk", line 100, in
app = SoftwarePropertiesGtk(datadir=options.data_dir, options=options,
file=file)
^^^
File
"/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/softwareproperties/gtk/SoftwarePropertiesGtk.py",
line 163, in __init__
SoftwareProperties.__init__(self, options=options, datadir=datadir,
File
"/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/softwareproperties/SoftwareProperties.py", line
109, in __init__
self.backup_sourceslist()
File
"/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/softwareproperties/SoftwareProperties.py", line
437, in backup_sourceslist
source_bkp = SourceEntry(line=source.line,file=source.file)
^^
File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/aptsources/sourceslist.py", line 509,
in __init__
raise ValueError("Classic SourceEntry cannot be written to .sources file")
ValueError: Classic SourceEntry cannot be written to .sources file
corrado@corrado-n4-nn-0215:~$
ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 24.04
Package: software-properties-gtk 0.99.42
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 6.6.0-14.14-generic 6.6.3
Uname: Linux 6.6.0-14-generic x86_64
ApportVersion: 2.27.0-0ubuntu6
Architecture: amd64
CasperMD5CheckResult: pass
CurrentDesktop: ubuntu:GNOME
Date: Thu Feb 15 10:07:43 2024
InstallationDate: Installed on 2024-02-15 (0 days ago)
InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 24.04 LTS "Noble Numbat" - Daily amd64 (20240215)
PackageArchitecture: all
ProcEnviron:
LANG=en_US.UTF-8
PATH=(custom, no user)
SHELL=/bin/bash
TERM=xterm-256color
XDG_RUNTIME_DIR=
SourcePackage: software-properties
UpgradeStatus: No upgrade log present (probably fresh install)
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/software-properties/+bug/2053228/+subscriptions
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2055193] Re: [FFe] APT 24.04 crypto policy update
** Changed in: gnupg (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Fix Committed
** Package changed: gnupg (Ubuntu) => gnupg2 (Ubuntu)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2055193
Title:
[FFe] APT 24.04 crypto policy update
Status in apt package in Ubuntu:
New
Status in gnupg2 package in Ubuntu:
Fix Committed
Bug description:
I don't know if this will land before the feature freeze but I'm
filing this in any case:
Our goal for 24.04 is to reject 1024-bit RSA repository signing keys.
Work is ongoing in Launchpad to allow dual-signing PPAs and then
resign all PPAs with a 4096-bit key.
This needs the following changes:
1) The gnupg upstream commit for https://dev.gnupg.org/T6946 needs to be
backported. This is applying fine and in the package already, but the test
suite fails with issues that look weirdly unrelated.
2) APT needs to learn to pass the argument if supported
3) APT needs to learn to interpret the output
4) APT possibly may have to learn to issue warnings instead of errors for
weak keys and pass the URL to the gpgv method to allow 1024-bit RSA keys over
TLS connections, in case there are unforeseen issues with the PPA migration.
Signing key policy: We would like to adopt a signing key policy of
rsa>2048,ed25519,ed448
As a result we would like to reject
- RSA keys below 2048 bits
- DSA keys
- Unsafe ECC keys:
- NIST P-{256,384,521}
- Brainpool P-{256,384,512}
- secp256k1
Notes:
- DSA keys are not possible to use anymore due to the deprecation of SHA1
that happened years ago
- NIST and Brainpool and secp256k1 are not very popular,
https://safecurves.cr.yp.to/ lists all of them as unsafe. It is believed they
have backdoors. Some FIPS customers may prefer them over Ed25519 and Ed448 as
they have been approved longer, so it's possible fips support packages could
reenable them by setting the correct apt.conf setting in a snippet.
Timing wrt feature freeze and launchpad changes:
Launchpad changes won't be landing before feature freeze and it will
take some more weeks to resign the repositories, hence we need to do
uploads after FF to enable the error by default even if we ship the
functionality before it.
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/2055193/+subscriptions
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2054908] Re: gpg-wks-server pulls in postfix
** Changed in: gnupg2 (Ubuntu) Status: Confirmed => Won't Fix -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054908 Title: gpg-wks-server pulls in postfix Status in Auto Package Testing: New Status in apt package in Ubuntu: Invalid Status in gnupg2 package in Ubuntu: Won't Fix Status in munin package in Ubuntu: Invalid Status in ubuntu-release-upgrader package in Ubuntu: Confirmed Bug description: Example 1 I did a sudo apt dist-upgrade today on my developer machine running Ubuntu Desktop 24.04 LTS and it surprisingly pulled in postfix. I did not built this into a full reproducible test case because I found another test case… Example 2 munin's autopkgtests are now failing because postfix is now unexpectedly being installed. https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/munin/noble/amd64 Other Info gnupg2's changelog indicates that there was an attempt to avoid this misbehavior by having gnupg only Suggest gpg-wks-server. In fact, there is **nothing** in Ubuntu 24.04 LTS that Depends or Recommends gpg-wks-server. I added a munin bug task as a pointer in case anyone wonder's about the autopkgtest regression but I don't believe munin needs any changes. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/auto-package-testing/+bug/2054908/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2055193] [NEW] [FFe] APT 24.04 crypto policy update
Public bug reported:
I don't know if this will land before the feature freeze but I'm filing
this in any case:
Our goal for 24.04 is to reject 1024-bit RSA repository signing keys.
Work is ongoing in Launchpad to allow dual-signing PPAs and then resign
all PPAs with a 4096-bit key.
This needs the following changes:
1) The gnupg upstream commit for https://dev.gnupg.org/T6946 needs to be
backported. This is applying fine and in the package already, but the test
suite fails with issues that look weirdly unrelated.
2) APT needs to learn to pass the argument if supported
3) APT needs to learn to interpret the output
4) APT possibly may have to learn to issue warnings instead of errors for weak
keys and pass the URL to the gpgv method to allow 1024-bit RSA keys over TLS
connections, in case there are unforeseen issues with the PPA migration.
Signing key policy: We would like to adopt a signing key policy of
rsa>2048,ed25519,ed448
As a result we would like to reject
- RSA keys below 2048 bits
- DSA keys
- Unsafe ECC keys:
- NIST P-{256,384,521}
- Brainpool P-{256,384,512}
- secp256k1
Notes:
- DSA keys are not possible to use anymore due to the deprecation of SHA1 that
happened years ago
- NIST and Brainpool and secp256k1 are not very popular,
https://safecurves.cr.yp.to/ lists all of them as unsafe. It is believed they
have backdoors. Some FIPS customers may prefer them over Ed25519 and Ed448 as
they have been approved longer, so it's possible fips support packages could
reenable them by setting the correct apt.conf setting in a snippet.
Timing wrt feature freeze and launchpad changes:
Launchpad changes won't be landing before feature freeze and it will
take some more weeks to resign the repositories, hence we need to do
uploads after FF to enable the error by default even if we ship the
functionality before it.
** Affects: apt (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Affects: gnupg (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Description changed:
I don't know if this will land before the feature freeze but I'm filing
this in any case:
Our goal for 24.04 is to reject 1024-bit RSA repository signing keys.
Work is ongoing in Launchpad to allow dual-signing PPAs and then resign
all PPAs with a 4096-bit key.
This needs the following changes:
- 1) The gnupg upstream commit for https://dev.gnupg.org/T6946 needs to be
backported
+ 1) The gnupg upstream commit for https://dev.gnupg.org/T6946 needs to be
backported. This is applying fine and in the package already, but the test
suite fails with issues that look weirdly unrelated.
2) APT needs to learn to pass the argument if supported
3) APT needs to learn to interpret the output
4) APT possibly may have to learn to issue warnings instead of errors for
weak keys and pass the URL to the gpgv method to allow 1024-bit RSA keys over
TLS connections, in case there are unforeseen issues with the PPA migration.
-
Signing key policy: We would like to adopt a signing key policy of
rsa>2048,ed25519,ed448
As a result we would like to reject
- RSA keys below 2048 bits
- DSA keys
- Unsafe ECC keys:
- - NIST P-{256,384,521}
- - Brainpool P-{256,384,512}
- - secp256k1
+ - NIST P-{256,384,521}
+ - Brainpool P-{256,384,512}
+ - secp256k1
Notes:
- DSA keys are not possible to use anymore due to the deprecation of SHA1
that happened years ago
- NIST and Brainpool and secp256k1 are not very popular,
https://safecurves.cr.yp.to/ lists all of them as unsafe. It is believed they
have backdoors. Some FIPS customers may prefer them over Ed25519 and Ed448 as
they have been approved longer, so it's possible fips support packages could
reenable them by setting the correct apt.conf setting in a snippet.
** Also affects: gnupg (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Description changed:
I don't know if this will land before the feature freeze but I'm filing
this in any case:
Our goal for 24.04 is to reject 1024-bit RSA repository signing keys.
Work is ongoing in Launchpad to allow dual-signing PPAs and then resign
all PPAs with a 4096-bit key.
This needs the following changes:
1) The gnupg upstream commit for https://dev.gnupg.org/T6946 needs to be
backported. This is applying fine and in the package already, but the test
suite fails with issues that look weirdly unrelated.
2) APT needs to learn to pass the argument if supported
3) APT needs to learn to interpret the output
4) APT possibly may have to learn to issue warnings instead of errors for
weak keys and pass the URL to the gpgv method to allow 1024-bit RSA keys over
TLS connections, in case there are unforeseen issues with the PPA migration.
Signing key policy: We would like to adopt a signing key policy of
rsa>2048,ed25519,ed448
As a result we would like to reject
- RSA keys below 2048 bits
- DSA keys
- Unsafe ECC keys:
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2055146] Re: Upgrade from Jammy to Noble breaks
** Changed in: dash (Ubuntu) Status: New => In Progress ** Changed in: dash (Ubuntu) Status: In Progress => Fix Committed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to dash in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2055146 Title: Upgrade from Jammy to Noble breaks Status in dash package in Ubuntu: Fix Committed Bug description: Hello there! Upgrading `dash` from Jammy to Noble is broken. Here is a quick reproducer: ``` podman pull ubuntu:jammy podman run -it --rm ubuntu:jammy sed -i 's/jammy/noble/' /etc/apt/sources.list apt update apt full-upgrade ``` This should end up with this error: ``` Setting up dash (0.5.12-6ubuntu3) ... Removing 'diversion of /usr/share/man/man1/sh.1.gz to /usr/share/man/man1/sh.distrib.1.gz by dash' Removing 'diversion of /bin/sh to /bin/sh.distrib by dash' This should never be reached dpkg: error processing package dash (--configure): installed dash package post-installation script subprocess returned error exit status 1 Errors were encountered while processing: dash E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) ``` As `dash` is pre-installed on almost every kind of Ubuntu, this breaks any upgrade from Jammy to Noble in practice. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dash/+bug/2055146/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2054925] Re: Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7
Slrry I can make this clearer too by adding a mantic task and marking it as fix released. ** Also affects: base-files (Ubuntu Mantic) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Also affects: debootstrap (Ubuntu Mantic) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Changed in: debootstrap (Ubuntu Mantic) Status: New => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to base-files in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054925 Title: Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7 Status in base-files package in Ubuntu: Won't Fix Status in debootstrap package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in debootstrap source package in Focal: In Progress Status in debootstrap source package in Jammy: In Progress Status in base-files source package in Mantic: New Status in debootstrap source package in Mantic: Fix Released Bug description: [Impact] The last couple of days, I have been unable to run a successful debootstrap for Noble Numbat. Apparently this is caused by the addition of symlinks (/bin, /lib, /lib64 and /sbin) in base-files 13ubuntu7. According to debootstrap.log, it fails to extract said symlinks because they already exist at that point. This can be reproduced on build hosts running Jammy Jellyfish against any up-to-date Ubuntu public archive mirror as of today. # lsb_release -a No LSB modules are available. Distributor ID: Ubuntu Description: Ubuntu 22.04.4 LTS Release: 22.04 Codename: jammy # apt-cache policy debootstrap debootstrap: Installed: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 Candidate: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 Version table: *** 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 500 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main amd64 Packages 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main i386 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status 1.0.126+nmu1 500 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main amd64 Packages 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main i386 Packages Attached shell output of two runs of debootstrap. First run uses mirror archive.ubuntu.com (which as of this report serves base-files version 13ubuntu7), and second run uses a local custom mirror (which serves base-files 13ubuntu6). First run fails, second run succeeds. [Test plan] Successfully for each of focal, jammy, mantic, noble - debootstrap - mksbuild - pbuilder whatever chroot management tool it has - ubuntu-image, if we can pull debootstrap from proposed for this as well as - debootstrap noble --merged-usr [Where problems could occur] We do not anticipate any regressions as we replace the previous *) case for usrmerge for post-hirsute with a new jammy|kinetic|lunar|mantic one, and the new solution will only impact noble and onward. That said, this is a different approach than mantic and newer take, and a different approach than Debian takes, where they moved to merging post-extraction, even in stable releases. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/base-files/+bug/2054925/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2054925] Re: Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7
** Description changed: [Impact] The last couple of days, I have been unable to run a successful debootstrap for Noble Numbat. Apparently this is caused by the addition of symlinks (/bin, /lib, /lib64 and /sbin) in base-files 13ubuntu7. According to debootstrap.log, it fails to extract said symlinks because they already exist at that point. This can be reproduced on build hosts running Jammy Jellyfish against any up-to-date Ubuntu public archive mirror as of today. # lsb_release -a No LSB modules are available. Distributor ID: Ubuntu Description: Ubuntu 22.04.4 LTS Release: 22.04 Codename: jammy # apt-cache policy debootstrap debootstrap: Installed: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 Candidate: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 Version table: *** 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 500 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main amd64 Packages 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main i386 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status 1.0.126+nmu1 500 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main amd64 Packages 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main i386 Packages Attached shell output of two runs of debootstrap. First run uses mirror archive.ubuntu.com (which as of this report serves base-files version 13ubuntu7), and second run uses a local custom mirror (which serves base-files 13ubuntu6). First run fails, second run succeeds. [Test plan] - Successfully - - debootstrap focal - - debootstrap jammy - - debootstrap mantic - - debootstrap noble + Successfully for each of focal, jammy, mantic, noble + - debootstrap + - mksbuild + - pbuilder whatever chroot management tool it has + - ubuntu-image, if we can pull debootstrap from proposed for this + + as well as + - debootstrap noble --merged-usr - both in buildd and normal variant, also specifically for noble, - --merged-usr should be ignored. [Where problems could occur] We do not anticipate any regressions as we replace the previous *) case for usrmerge for post-hirsute with a new jammy|kinetic|lunar|mantic one, and the new solution will only impact noble and onward. That said, this is a different approach than mantic and newer take, and a different approach than Debian takes, where they moved to merging post-extraction, even in stable releases. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to base-files in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054925 Title: Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7 Status in base-files package in Ubuntu: Won't Fix Status in debootstrap package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in debootstrap source package in Focal: In Progress Status in debootstrap source package in Jammy: In Progress Bug description: [Impact] The last couple of days, I have been unable to run a successful debootstrap for Noble Numbat. Apparently this is caused by the addition of symlinks (/bin, /lib, /lib64 and /sbin) in base-files 13ubuntu7. According to debootstrap.log, it fails to extract said symlinks because they already exist at that point. This can be reproduced on build hosts running Jammy Jellyfish against any up-to-date Ubuntu public archive mirror as of today. # lsb_release -a No LSB modules are available. Distributor ID: Ubuntu Description: Ubuntu 22.04.4 LTS Release: 22.04 Codename: jammy # apt-cache policy debootstrap debootstrap: Installed: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 Candidate: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 Version table: *** 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 500 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main amd64 Packages 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main i386 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status 1.0.126+nmu1 500 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main amd64 Packages 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main i386 Packages Attached shell output of two runs of debootstrap. First run uses mirror archive.ubuntu.com (which as of this report serves base-files version 13ubuntu7), and second run uses a local custom mirror (which serves base-files 13ubuntu6). First run fails, second run succeeds. [Test plan] Successfully for each of focal, jammy, mantic, noble - debootstrap - mksbuild - pbuilder whatever chroot management tool it has - ubuntu-image, if we can pull debootstrap from proposed for this as well as - debootstrap noble --merged-usr [Where problems could occur] We do not anticipate any regressions as we replace the previous *) case for usrmerge for post-hirsute with a new jammy|kinetic|lunar|mantic one, and the new solution will only impact noble and onward. That said, this is a different approach than mantic and newer take, and a different approach than Debian takes, where they moved to merging
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2054925] Re: Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7
** Changed in: debootstrap (Ubuntu Focal) Status: Triaged => In Progress -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to base-files in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054925 Title: Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7 Status in base-files package in Ubuntu: Won't Fix Status in debootstrap package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in debootstrap source package in Focal: In Progress Status in debootstrap source package in Jammy: In Progress Bug description: [Impact] The last couple of days, I have been unable to run a successful debootstrap for Noble Numbat. Apparently this is caused by the addition of symlinks (/bin, /lib, /lib64 and /sbin) in base-files 13ubuntu7. According to debootstrap.log, it fails to extract said symlinks because they already exist at that point. This can be reproduced on build hosts running Jammy Jellyfish against any up-to-date Ubuntu public archive mirror as of today. # lsb_release -a No LSB modules are available. Distributor ID: Ubuntu Description: Ubuntu 22.04.4 LTS Release: 22.04 Codename: jammy # apt-cache policy debootstrap debootstrap: Installed: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 Candidate: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 Version table: *** 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 500 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main amd64 Packages 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main i386 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status 1.0.126+nmu1 500 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main amd64 Packages 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main i386 Packages Attached shell output of two runs of debootstrap. First run uses mirror archive.ubuntu.com (which as of this report serves base-files version 13ubuntu7), and second run uses a local custom mirror (which serves base-files 13ubuntu6). First run fails, second run succeeds. [Test plan] Successfully - debootstrap focal - debootstrap jammy - debootstrap mantic - debootstrap noble - debootstrap noble --merged-usr both in buildd and normal variant, also specifically for noble, --merged-usr should be ignored. [Where problems could occur] We do not anticipate any regressions as we replace the previous *) case for usrmerge for post-hirsute with a new jammy|kinetic|lunar|mantic one, and the new solution will only impact noble and onward. That said, this is a different approach than mantic and newer take, and a different approach than Debian takes, where they moved to merging post-extraction, even in stable releases. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/base-files/+bug/2054925/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2054925] Re: Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7
** Description changed: [Impact] The last couple of days, I have been unable to run a successful debootstrap for Noble Numbat. Apparently this is caused by the addition of symlinks (/bin, /lib, /lib64 and /sbin) in base-files 13ubuntu7. According to debootstrap.log, it fails to extract said symlinks because they already exist at that point. This can be reproduced on build hosts running Jammy Jellyfish against any up-to-date Ubuntu public archive mirror as of today. # lsb_release -a No LSB modules are available. Distributor ID: Ubuntu Description: Ubuntu 22.04.4 LTS Release: 22.04 Codename: jammy # apt-cache policy debootstrap debootstrap: Installed: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 Candidate: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 Version table: *** 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 500 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main amd64 Packages 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main i386 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status 1.0.126+nmu1 500 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main amd64 Packages 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main i386 Packages Attached shell output of two runs of debootstrap. First run uses mirror archive.ubuntu.com (which as of this report serves base-files version 13ubuntu7), and second run uses a local custom mirror (which serves base-files 13ubuntu6). First run fails, second run succeeds. [Test plan] Successfully + - debootstrap focal - debootstrap jammy - debootstrap mantic - debootstrap noble both in buildd and normal variant. [Where problems could occur] We do not anticipate any regressions as we replace the previous *) case for usrmerge for post-hirsute with a new jammy|kinetic|lunar|mantic one, and the new solution will only impact noble and onward. That said, this is a different approach than mantic and newer take, and a different approach than Debian takes, where they moved to merging post-extraction, even in stable releases. ** Description changed: [Impact] The last couple of days, I have been unable to run a successful debootstrap for Noble Numbat. Apparently this is caused by the addition of symlinks (/bin, /lib, /lib64 and /sbin) in base-files 13ubuntu7. According to debootstrap.log, it fails to extract said symlinks because they already exist at that point. This can be reproduced on build hosts running Jammy Jellyfish against any up-to-date Ubuntu public archive mirror as of today. # lsb_release -a No LSB modules are available. Distributor ID: Ubuntu Description: Ubuntu 22.04.4 LTS Release: 22.04 Codename: jammy # apt-cache policy debootstrap debootstrap: Installed: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 Candidate: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 Version table: *** 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 500 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main amd64 Packages 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main i386 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status 1.0.126+nmu1 500 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main amd64 Packages 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main i386 Packages Attached shell output of two runs of debootstrap. First run uses mirror archive.ubuntu.com (which as of this report serves base-files version 13ubuntu7), and second run uses a local custom mirror (which serves base-files 13ubuntu6). First run fails, second run succeeds. [Test plan] Successfully - debootstrap focal - debootstrap jammy - debootstrap mantic - debootstrap noble - both in buildd and normal variant. + both in buildd and normal variant, also specifically for noble, + --merged-usr should be ignored. [Where problems could occur] We do not anticipate any regressions as we replace the previous *) case for usrmerge for post-hirsute with a new jammy|kinetic|lunar|mantic one, and the new solution will only impact noble and onward. That said, this is a different approach than mantic and newer take, and a different approach than Debian takes, where they moved to merging post-extraction, even in stable releases. ** Description changed: [Impact] The last couple of days, I have been unable to run a successful debootstrap for Noble Numbat. Apparently this is caused by the addition of symlinks (/bin, /lib, /lib64 and /sbin) in base-files 13ubuntu7. According to debootstrap.log, it fails to extract said symlinks because they already exist at that point. This can be reproduced on build hosts running Jammy Jellyfish against any up-to-date Ubuntu public archive mirror as of today. # lsb_release -a No LSB modules are available. Distributor ID: Ubuntu Description: Ubuntu 22.04.4 LTS Release: 22.04 Codename: jammy # apt-cache policy debootstrap debootstrap: Installed: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2054925] Re: Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7
** Changed in: debootstrap (Ubuntu Jammy) Status: Triaged => In Progress -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to base-files in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054925 Title: Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7 Status in base-files package in Ubuntu: Won't Fix Status in debootstrap package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in debootstrap source package in Focal: Triaged Status in debootstrap source package in Jammy: In Progress Bug description: [Impact] The last couple of days, I have been unable to run a successful debootstrap for Noble Numbat. Apparently this is caused by the addition of symlinks (/bin, /lib, /lib64 and /sbin) in base-files 13ubuntu7. According to debootstrap.log, it fails to extract said symlinks because they already exist at that point. This can be reproduced on build hosts running Jammy Jellyfish against any up-to-date Ubuntu public archive mirror as of today. # lsb_release -a No LSB modules are available. Distributor ID: Ubuntu Description: Ubuntu 22.04.4 LTS Release: 22.04 Codename: jammy # apt-cache policy debootstrap debootstrap: Installed: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 Candidate: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 Version table: *** 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 500 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main amd64 Packages 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main i386 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status 1.0.126+nmu1 500 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main amd64 Packages 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main i386 Packages Attached shell output of two runs of debootstrap. First run uses mirror archive.ubuntu.com (which as of this report serves base-files version 13ubuntu7), and second run uses a local custom mirror (which serves base-files 13ubuntu6). First run fails, second run succeeds. [Test plan] Successfully - debootstrap focal - debootstrap jammy - debootstrap mantic - debootstrap noble both in buildd and normal variant. [Where problems could occur] We do not anticipate any regressions as we replace the previous *) case for usrmerge for post-hirsute with a new jammy|kinetic|lunar|mantic one, and the new solution will only impact noble and onward. That said, this is a different approach than mantic and newer take, and a different approach than Debian takes, where they moved to merging post-extraction, even in stable releases. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/base-files/+bug/2054925/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2054925] Re: Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7
** Description changed: - The last couple of days, I have been unable to run a successful - debootstrap for Noble Numbat. + [Impact] + The last couple of days, I have been unable to run a successful debootstrap for Noble Numbat. Apparently this is caused by the addition of symlinks (/bin, /lib, /lib64 and /sbin) in base-files 13ubuntu7. According to debootstrap.log, it fails to extract said symlinks because they already exist at that point. This can be reproduced on build hosts running Jammy Jellyfish against any up-to-date Ubuntu public archive mirror as of today. # lsb_release -a No LSB modules are available. Distributor ID: Ubuntu Description: Ubuntu 22.04.4 LTS Release: 22.04 Codename: jammy # apt-cache policy debootstrap debootstrap: - Installed: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 - Candidate: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 - Version table: - *** 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 500 - 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main amd64 Packages - 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main i386 Packages - 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status - 1.0.126+nmu1 500 - 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main amd64 Packages - 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main i386 Packages - + Installed: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 + Candidate: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 + Version table: + *** 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 500 + 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main amd64 Packages + 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main i386 Packages + 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status + 1.0.126+nmu1 500 + 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main amd64 Packages + 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main i386 Packages Attached shell output of two runs of debootstrap. First run uses mirror archive.ubuntu.com (which as of this report serves base-files version 13ubuntu7), and second run uses a local custom mirror (which serves base-files 13ubuntu6). First run fails, second run succeeds. + + [Test plan] + Successfully + - debootstrap jammy + - debootstrap mantic + - debootstrap noble + + both in buildd and normal variant. + + [Where problems could occur] + We do not anticipate any regressions as we replace the previous *) case for usrmerge for post-hirsute with a new jammy|kinetic|lunar|mantic one, and the new solution will only impact noble and onward. + + That said, this is a different approach than mantic and newer take, and + a different approach than Debian takes, where they moved to merging + post-extraction, even in stable releases. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to base-files in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054925 Title: Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7 Status in base-files package in Ubuntu: Won't Fix Status in debootstrap package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in debootstrap source package in Focal: Triaged Status in debootstrap source package in Jammy: Triaged Bug description: [Impact] The last couple of days, I have been unable to run a successful debootstrap for Noble Numbat. Apparently this is caused by the addition of symlinks (/bin, /lib, /lib64 and /sbin) in base-files 13ubuntu7. According to debootstrap.log, it fails to extract said symlinks because they already exist at that point. This can be reproduced on build hosts running Jammy Jellyfish against any up-to-date Ubuntu public archive mirror as of today. # lsb_release -a No LSB modules are available. Distributor ID: Ubuntu Description: Ubuntu 22.04.4 LTS Release: 22.04 Codename: jammy # apt-cache policy debootstrap debootstrap: Installed: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 Candidate: 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 Version table: *** 1.0.126+nmu1ubuntu0.5 500 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main amd64 Packages 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main i386 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status 1.0.126+nmu1 500 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main amd64 Packages 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main i386 Packages Attached shell output of two runs of debootstrap. First run uses mirror archive.ubuntu.com (which as of this report serves base-files version 13ubuntu7), and second run uses a local custom mirror (which serves base-files 13ubuntu6). First run fails, second run succeeds. [Test plan] Successfully - debootstrap jammy - debootstrap mantic - debootstrap noble both in buildd and normal variant. [Where problems could occur] We do not anticipate any regressions as we replace the previous *) case for usrmerge for post-hirsute with a new jammy|kinetic|lunar|mantic one, and the new solution will only impact noble and onward. That said, this is a different approach than
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2054908] Re: gpg-wks-server pulls in postfix
Remind me to add negative Recommends to apt at some point. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054908 Title: gpg-wks-server pulls in postfix Status in Auto Package Testing: New Status in apt package in Ubuntu: Invalid Status in gnupg2 package in Ubuntu: Confirmed Status in munin package in Ubuntu: Invalid Status in ubuntu-release-upgrader package in Ubuntu: Confirmed Bug description: Example 1 I did a sudo apt dist-upgrade today on my developer machine running Ubuntu Desktop 24.04 LTS and it surprisingly pulled in postfix. I did not built this into a full reproducible test case because I found another test case… Example 2 munin's autopkgtests are now failing because postfix is now unexpectedly being installed. https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/munin/noble/amd64 Other Info gnupg2's changelog indicates that there was an attempt to avoid this misbehavior by having gnupg only Suggest gpg-wks-server. In fact, there is **nothing** in Ubuntu 24.04 LTS that Depends or Recommends gpg-wks-server. I added a munin bug task as a pointer in case anyone wonder's about the autopkgtest regression but I don't believe munin needs any changes. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/auto-package-testing/+bug/2054908/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2054925] Re: Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7
As a workaround, --no-merged-usr probably should work fine in old releases. It might be easier to add this to the script as a special case for > noble than backporting new logic we don't need anymore. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to base-files in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054925 Title: Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7 Status in base-files package in Ubuntu: Won't Fix Status in debootstrap package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in debootstrap source package in Focal: Triaged Status in debootstrap source package in Jammy: Triaged Bug description: The last couple of days, I have been unable to run a successful debootstrap for Noble Numbat. Apparently this is caused by the addition of symlinks (/bin, /lib, /lib64 and /sbin) in base-files 13ubuntu7. According to debootstrap.log, it fails to extract said symlinks because they already exist at that point. This can be reproduced against any up-to-date Ubuntu public archive mirror as of today. Attached shell output of two runs of debootstrap. First run uses mirror archive.ubuntu.com (which as of this report serves base-files version 13ubuntu7), and second run uses a local custom mirror (which serves base-files 13ubuntu6). First run fails, second run succeeds. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/base-files/+bug/2054925/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2054925] Re: Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7
I forgot we can't rely on preinst in bootstrap so backporting the debootstrap change it will have to be. ** Changed in: base-files (Ubuntu) Status: Incomplete => Won't Fix -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to base-files in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054925 Title: Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7 Status in base-files package in Ubuntu: Won't Fix Status in debootstrap package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in debootstrap source package in Focal: Triaged Status in debootstrap source package in Jammy: Triaged Bug description: The last couple of days, I have been unable to run a successful debootstrap for Noble Numbat. Apparently this is caused by the addition of symlinks (/bin, /lib, /lib64 and /sbin) in base-files 13ubuntu7. According to debootstrap.log, it fails to extract said symlinks because they already exist at that point. This can be reproduced against any up-to-date Ubuntu public archive mirror as of today. Attached shell output of two runs of debootstrap. First run uses mirror archive.ubuntu.com (which as of this report serves base-files version 13ubuntu7), and second run uses a local custom mirror (which serves base-files 13ubuntu6). First run fails, second run succeeds. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/base-files/+bug/2054925/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2054925] Re: Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7
I wrote instead but of course it's in addition, I think that's probably the easier outcome than trying to workaround it in the base-files preinst. Consulting with helmut -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to base-files in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054925 Title: Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7 Status in base-files package in Ubuntu: Won't Fix Status in debootstrap package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in debootstrap source package in Focal: Triaged Status in debootstrap source package in Jammy: Triaged Bug description: The last couple of days, I have been unable to run a successful debootstrap for Noble Numbat. Apparently this is caused by the addition of symlinks (/bin, /lib, /lib64 and /sbin) in base-files 13ubuntu7. According to debootstrap.log, it fails to extract said symlinks because they already exist at that point. This can be reproduced against any up-to-date Ubuntu public archive mirror as of today. Attached shell output of two runs of debootstrap. First run uses mirror archive.ubuntu.com (which as of this report serves base-files version 13ubuntu7), and second run uses a local custom mirror (which serves base-files 13ubuntu6). First run fails, second run succeeds. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/base-files/+bug/2054925/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2054925] Re: Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7
Let me move this to debootstrap tasks instead, I guess we should fix the LTS debootstraps. ** Changed in: debootstrap (Ubuntu Focal) Status: New => Triaged ** Changed in: debootstrap (Ubuntu Jammy) Status: New => Triaged -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to base-files in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054925 Title: Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7 Status in base-files package in Ubuntu: Incomplete Status in debootstrap package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in debootstrap source package in Focal: Triaged Status in debootstrap source package in Jammy: Triaged Bug description: The last couple of days, I have been unable to run a successful debootstrap for Noble Numbat. Apparently this is caused by the addition of symlinks (/bin, /lib, /lib64 and /sbin) in base-files 13ubuntu7. According to debootstrap.log, it fails to extract said symlinks because they already exist at that point. This can be reproduced against any up-to-date Ubuntu public archive mirror as of today. Attached shell output of two runs of debootstrap. First run uses mirror archive.ubuntu.com (which as of this report serves base-files version 13ubuntu7), and second run uses a local custom mirror (which serves base-files 13ubuntu6). First run fails, second run succeeds. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/base-files/+bug/2054925/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2054925] Re: Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7
Steve I'm sorry but I cannot reproduce this. I have verified this countless of times during working on this and I am also unable to verify this here: # apt policy debootstrap debootstrap: Installed: 1.0.134ubuntu1 Candidate: 1.0.134ubuntu1 Version table: *** 1.0.134ubuntu1 500 500 https://debian.charite.de/ubuntu noble/main amd64 Packages 500 https://debian.charite.de/ubuntu noble/main i386 Packages 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu noble/main amd64 Packages 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu noble/main i386 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status # rm -r /tmp/nobletest/ && sudo debootstrap --variant=minbase noble /tmp/nobletest &> debootstrap.log # grep base-files debootstrap.log I: Retrieving base-files 13ubuntu7 I: Validating base-files 13ubuntu7 I: Extracting base-files... I: Unpacking base-files... I: Configuring base-files... # tail debootstrap.log I: Configuring libtasn1-6:amd64... I: Configuring libstdc++6:amd64... I: Configuring libhogweed6:amd64... I: Configuring libidn2-0:amd64... I: Configuring libapt-pkg6.0:amd64... I: Configuring libp11-kit0:amd64... I: Configuring libgnutls30:amd64... I: Configuring apt... I: Configuring libc-bin... I: Base system installed successfully. Your debootstrap log looks fine, it extracts base-files first. At this point, /tmp/nobletest should be empty. Unless I suppose you use a old broken version of debootstrap that used to create the symlinks before extracting the packages? debootstrap (1.0.130) unstable; urgency=medium [ Helmut Grohne ] * implement merged-/usr by post-merging. Closes: #1049898 -- Luca Boccassi Fri, 18 Aug 2023 16:02:59 +0100 ** Changed in: base-files (Ubuntu) Status: New => Incomplete ** Also affects: debootstrap (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Also affects: base-files (Ubuntu Focal) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Also affects: debootstrap (Ubuntu Focal) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Also affects: base-files (Ubuntu Jammy) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Also affects: debootstrap (Ubuntu Jammy) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** No longer affects: base-files (Ubuntu Focal) ** No longer affects: base-files (Ubuntu Jammy) ** Changed in: debootstrap (Ubuntu) Status: New => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to base-files in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054925 Title: Debootstrap fails for Noble with base-files 13ubuntu7 Status in base-files package in Ubuntu: Incomplete Status in debootstrap package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in debootstrap source package in Focal: Triaged Status in debootstrap source package in Jammy: Triaged Bug description: The last couple of days, I have been unable to run a successful debootstrap for Noble Numbat. Apparently this is caused by the addition of symlinks (/bin, /lib, /lib64 and /sbin) in base-files 13ubuntu7. According to debootstrap.log, it fails to extract said symlinks because they already exist at that point. This can be reproduced against any up-to-date Ubuntu public archive mirror as of today. Attached shell output of two runs of debootstrap. First run uses mirror archive.ubuntu.com (which as of this report serves base-files version 13ubuntu7), and second run uses a local custom mirror (which serves base-files 13ubuntu6). First run fails, second run succeeds. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/base-files/+bug/2054925/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2054908] Re: gpg-wks-server pulls in postfix
Steve - it is a server package for hosting a web key server, it's entirely reasonable for it to depend on a mail transport agent. A WKS server, upon uploading a key, sends confirmation emails to the UIDs in the key, before publishing it, so that it only published keys with consent. It's problematic that it was installed by default, and I'm fixing this here and in Debian by doing the restructuring I did. This is not optimal for people upgrading without quirks (i.e. Debian users especially) but I don't think breaking the wks server to make upgrades without quirks nicer is a better choice. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054908 Title: gpg-wks-server pulls in postfix Status in Auto Package Testing: New Status in apt package in Ubuntu: Invalid Status in gnupg2 package in Ubuntu: Confirmed Status in munin package in Ubuntu: Invalid Status in ubuntu-release-upgrader package in Ubuntu: Confirmed Bug description: Example 1 I did a sudo apt dist-upgrade today on my developer machine running Ubuntu Desktop 24.04 LTS and it surprisingly pulled in postfix. I did not built this into a full reproducible test case because I found another test case… Example 2 munin's autopkgtests are now failing because postfix is now unexpectedly being installed. https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/munin/noble/amd64 Other Info gnupg2's changelog indicates that there was an attempt to avoid this misbehavior by having gnupg only Suggest gpg-wks-server. In fact, there is **nothing** in Ubuntu 24.04 LTS that Depends or Recommends gpg-wks-server. I added a munin bug task as a pointer in case anyone wonder's about the autopkgtest regression but I don't believe munin needs any changes. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/auto-package-testing/+bug/2054908/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2054908] Re: gnupg is pulling in gpg-wks-server which pulls in postfix
gpg-wks-server is not a new dependency so upgrading will of course pull in a newer version until you remove it. The images will be fixed eventually when they get rebuilt from scratch. For upgrades, we can quirk this to avoid upgrading it only for it to become auto removable later. ** Changed in: gnupg2 (Ubuntu) Status: New => Invalid ** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu) Status: New => Invalid ** Changed in: munin (Ubuntu) Status: Triaged => Invalid ** Also affects: ubuntu-release-upgrader (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Also affects: auto-package-testing Importance: Undecided Status: New -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054908 Title: gnupg is pulling in gpg-wks-server which pulls in postfix Status in Auto Package Testing: New Status in apt package in Ubuntu: Invalid Status in gnupg2 package in Ubuntu: Invalid Status in munin package in Ubuntu: Invalid Status in ubuntu-release-upgrader package in Ubuntu: New Bug description: Example 1 I did a sudo apt dist-upgrade today on my developer machine running Ubuntu Desktop 24.04 LTS and it surprisingly pulled in postfix. I did not built this into a full reproducible test case because I found another test case… Example 2 munin's autopkgtests are now failing because postfix and gpg-wks-server is now unexpectedly being installed. https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/munin/noble/amd64 Other Info gnupg2's changelog indicates that there was an attempt to avoid this misbehavior by having gnupg only Suggest gpg-wks-server. In fact, there is **nothing** in Ubuntu that Depends or Recommends gpg-wks-server. Notably, gnupg has Suggests: gpg-wks-server (<< 2.4.4-2ubuntu7.1~), gpg-wks-server (>= 2.4.4-2ubuntu7) I don't recall ever seeing strict versioned Suggests before so it's my wild guess that apt does not strict handle versioned Suggests in the expected way. As a workaround, try dropping the versions from gnupg's Suggests. But the true fix may be in apt. I added a munin bug task as a pointer in case anyone wonder's about the autopkgtest regression but I don't believe munin needs any changes. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/auto-package-testing/+bug/2054908/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2054719] Re: base-files, glibc lockstep migration blocking bug
apt and bzip2 have migrated, so we are ready to land them in the next britney run. ** Tags removed: block-proposed ** Changed in: base-files (Ubuntu) Status: New => Fix Released ** Changed in: glibc (Ubuntu) Status: New => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to base-files in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054719 Title: base-files, glibc lockstep migration blocking bug Status in base-files package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in glibc package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Bug description: With the new changes I'm uploading, taken from Helmut's patches on Debian bug tracker, base-files will own the /lib64 symlink, and /lib64 in libc6 will move to /usr/lib64. Special care has been taken to not break upgrades: You can upgrade the two in any order. However, debootstrap requires both packages to be at a matching version: 1. If base-files migrates first, the old libc6 would fail to unpack 2. If glibc migrates first, and is bootstrapped before base-files, we do not end up with the /lib64 symlink at all because debootstrap only *moves* an existing /lib64 (which now is no longer present). Since upgrades are fine due to having the symlink already, we do not want to solve this by introducing dependencies: We could have added mutual Depends or Breaks, but they would have required temporarily deconfiguring one of the packages to unpack the other on upgrades. Hence we'll mark this bug as block-proposed and remove the tag once both are ready to land. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/base-files/+bug/2054719/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2054719] Re: base-files, glibc lockstep migration blocking bug
** Tags added: block-proposed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to base-files in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054719 Title: base-files, glibc lockstep migration blocking bug Status in base-files package in Ubuntu: New Status in glibc package in Ubuntu: New Bug description: With the new changes I'm uploading, taken from Helmut's patches on Debian bug tracker, base-files will own the /lib64 symlink, and /lib64 in libc6 will move to /usr/lib64. Special care has been taken to not break upgrades: You can upgrade the two in any order. However, debootstrap requires both packages to be at a matching version: 1. If base-files migrates first, the old libc6 would fail to unpack 2. If glibc migrates first, and is bootstrapped before base-files, we do not end up with the /lib64 symlink at all because debootstrap only *moves* an existing /lib64 (which now is no longer present). Since upgrades are fine due to having the symlink already, we do not want to solve this by introducing dependencies: We could have added mutual Depends or Breaks, but they would have required temporarily deconfiguring one of the packages to unpack the other on upgrades. Hence we'll mark this bug as block-proposed and remove the tag once both are ready to land. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/base-files/+bug/2054719/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2054719] [NEW] base-files, glibc lockstep migration blocking bug
Public bug reported: With the new changes I'm uploading, taken from Helmut's patches on Debian bug tracker, base-files will own the /lib64 symlink, and /lib64 in libc6 will move to /usr/lib64. Special care has been taken to not break upgrades: You can upgrade the two in any order. However, debootstrap requires both packages to be at a matching version: 1. If base-files migrates first, the old libc6 would fail to unpack 2. If glibc migrates first, and is bootstrapped before base-files, we do not end up with the /lib64 symlink at all because debootstrap only *moves* an existing /lib64 (which now is no longer present). Since upgrades are fine due to having the symlink already, we do not want to solve this by introducing dependencies: We could have added mutual Depends or Breaks, but they would have required temporarily deconfiguring one of the packages to unpack the other on upgrades. Hence we'll mark this bug as block-proposed and remove the tag once both are ready to land. ** Affects: base-files (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Affects: glibc (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Also affects: glibc (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to base-files in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054719 Title: base-files, glibc lockstep migration blocking bug Status in base-files package in Ubuntu: New Status in glibc package in Ubuntu: New Bug description: With the new changes I'm uploading, taken from Helmut's patches on Debian bug tracker, base-files will own the /lib64 symlink, and /lib64 in libc6 will move to /usr/lib64. Special care has been taken to not break upgrades: You can upgrade the two in any order. However, debootstrap requires both packages to be at a matching version: 1. If base-files migrates first, the old libc6 would fail to unpack 2. If glibc migrates first, and is bootstrapped before base-files, we do not end up with the /lib64 symlink at all because debootstrap only *moves* an existing /lib64 (which now is no longer present). Since upgrades are fine due to having the symlink already, we do not want to solve this by introducing dependencies: We could have added mutual Depends or Breaks, but they would have required temporarily deconfiguring one of the packages to unpack the other on upgrades. Hence we'll mark this bug as block-proposed and remove the tag once both are ready to land. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/base-files/+bug/2054719/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2054319] Re: System installed from jammy point release iso cannot upgrade to noble
** No longer affects: tracker-miners (Ubuntu) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to policykit-1 in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054319 Title: System installed from jammy point release iso cannot upgrade to noble Status in gnome-shell package in Ubuntu: New Status in policykit-1 package in Ubuntu: New Status in ubuntu-release-upgrader package in Ubuntu: New Bug description: We have different crashes being encountered. In our auto-upgrade- testing, we see gnome-shell crash, however, when testing locally, I didn't experience this. @hyask did experience the gnome-shell crash though. When running an upgrade from jammy to noble in a virsh vm, about halfway through the upgrade process my gui dies. I then ran the upgrade from a console, to which it revealed that just the gui dies - the upgrade process, for me, continues and then laterally fails. ProblemType: Bug DistroRelease: Ubuntu 24.04 Package: ubuntu-release-upgrader-core 1:24.04.7 ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 6.6.0-14.14-generic 6.6.3 Uname: Linux 6.6.0-14-generic x86_64 ApportVersion: 2.27.0-0ubuntu7 Architecture: amd64 CasperMD5CheckResult: unknown CrashDB: ubuntu CrashReports: 640:1000:124:1592041:2024-02-19 14:26:22.564354912 +:2024-02-19 14:51:56.318947066 +:/var/crash/_usr_libexec_tracker-extract-3.1000.crash 600:0:124:833806:2024-02-19 14:34:18.370597600 +:2024-02-19 14:34:19.370597600 +:/var/crash/polkitd.0.crash Date: Mon Feb 19 14:53:39 2024 InstallationDate: Installed on 2024-02-19 (0 days ago) InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 22.04.4 LTS "Jammy Jellyfish" - Release amd64 (20240216.1) PackageArchitecture: all SourcePackage: ubuntu-release-upgrader Symptom: ubuntu-release-upgrader UpgradeStatus: Upgraded to noble on 2024-02-19 (0 days ago) VarLogDistupgradeAptclonesystemstate.tar.gz: Error: command ['pkexec', 'cat', '/var/log/dist-upgrade/apt-clone_system_state.tar.gz'] failed with exit code 127: pkexec must be setuid root VarLogDistupgradeXorgFixuplog: INFO:root:/usr/bin/do-release-upgrade running INFO:root:No xorg.conf, exiting mtime.conffile..etc.init.d.apport: 2024-02-14T15:51:44 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-shell/+bug/2054319/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2054450] [NEW] apport arm64 autopkgtest flaky
Public bug reported:
The following failure can sometimes be observed on arm64 in noble, for
example, with gnupg2 and sensible-utils:
360s === FAILURES
===
360s __ T.test_core_dump_packaged
___
360s
360s self =
360s
360s def test_core_dump_packaged(self):
360s """Packaged executables create core dumps on proper ulimits."""
360s # for SEGV and ABRT we expect reports and core files
360s for sig in (signal.SIGSEGV, signal.SIGABRT):
360s for kb, exp_file in core_ulimit_table:
360s resource.setrlimit(resource.RLIMIT_CORE, (kb, -1))
360s self.do_crash(
360s expect_corefile=exp_file,
360s expect_corefile_owner=os.geteuid(),
360s sig=sig,
360s )
360s > self.check_report_coredump(self.test_report)
360s
360s
/tmp/autopkgtest.pa788q/autopkgtest_tmp/tests/integration/test_signal_crashes.py:413:
360s _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _
360s
/tmp/autopkgtest.pa788q/autopkgtest_tmp/tests/integration/test_signal_crashes.py:1114:
in check_report_coredump
360s self.assertIn("\n#2", r.get("Stacktrace"))
360s E AssertionError: '\n#2' not found in '#0 0xf7fd6428 in ??
()\nNo symbol table info available.\n#1 0xf7ffd000 in ?? ()\nNo symbol
table info available.\nBacktrace stopped: previous frame inner to this frame
(corrupt stack?)'
360s - Captured stderr call
-
360s warning: 78../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/clock_nanosleep.c: No such
file or directory
360s warning: target file /proc/4152/cmdline contained unexpected null
characters
360s warning: 78../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/clock_nanosleep.c: No such
file or directory
360s warning: target file /proc/4228/cmdline contained unexpected null
characters
360s warning: 78../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/clock_nanosleep.c: No such
file or directory
360s warning: target file /proc/4308/cmdline contained unexpected null
characters
360s warning: 1972 ./elf/dl-load.c: No such file or directory
360s warning: target file /proc/4388/cmdline contained unexpected null
characters
360s warning: 1972 ./elf/dl-load.c: No such file or directory
360s warning: target file /proc/4463/cmdline contained unexpected null
characters
360s warning: 1150 ./elf/rtld.c: No such file or directory
360s warning: target file /proc/4539/cmdline contained unexpected null
characters
360s === warnings summary
===
** Affects: apport (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apport in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054450
Title:
apport arm64 autopkgtest flaky
Status in apport package in Ubuntu:
New
Bug description:
The following failure can sometimes be observed on arm64 in noble, for
example, with gnupg2 and sensible-utils:
360s === FAILURES
===
360s __ T.test_core_dump_packaged
___
360s
360s self =
360s
360s def test_core_dump_packaged(self):
360s """Packaged executables create core dumps on proper ulimits."""
360s # for SEGV and ABRT we expect reports and core files
360s for sig in (signal.SIGSEGV, signal.SIGABRT):
360s for kb, exp_file in core_ulimit_table:
360s resource.setrlimit(resource.RLIMIT_CORE, (kb, -1))
360s self.do_crash(
360s expect_corefile=exp_file,
360s expect_corefile_owner=os.geteuid(),
360s sig=sig,
360s )
360s > self.check_report_coredump(self.test_report)
360s
360s
/tmp/autopkgtest.pa788q/autopkgtest_tmp/tests/integration/test_signal_crashes.py:413:
360s _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _
360s
/tmp/autopkgtest.pa788q/autopkgtest_tmp/tests/integration/test_signal_crashes.py:1114:
in check_report_coredump
360s self.assertIn("\n#2", r.get("Stacktrace"))
360s E AssertionError: '\n#2' not found in '#0 0xf7fd6428 in ??
()\nNo symbol table info available.\n#1 0xf7ffd000 in ?? ()\nNo symbol
table info available.\nBacktrace stopped: previous frame inner to this frame
(corrupt stack?)'
360s - Captured stderr call
-
360s warning: 78 ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/clock_nanosleep.c: No such
file or directory
360s warning: target file /proc/4152/cmdline contained unexpected null
characters
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2053228] Re: software-properties-gtk does not start
I can confirm this on my system which is quite peculiar because I was
testing the changes on it but it's possible I made additional changes
after the changes that made software-properties work that broke it, or
something.
I'll schedule to look at this the week after next.
** Changed in: software-properties (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => Triaged
** Tags removed: rls-nn-incoming
** Tags added: foundations-todo
** Changed in: software-properties (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Julian Andres Klode (juliank)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to software-properties in
Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2053228
Title:
software-properties-gtk does not start
Status in software-properties package in Ubuntu:
Triaged
Bug description:
On a new install with the new format sources.list software-properties-gtk
does not start:
corrado@corrado-n4-nn-0215:~$ software-properties-gtk
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/bin/software-properties-gtk", line 100, in
app = SoftwarePropertiesGtk(datadir=options.data_dir, options=options,
file=file)
^^^
File
"/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/softwareproperties/gtk/SoftwarePropertiesGtk.py",
line 163, in __init__
SoftwareProperties.__init__(self, options=options, datadir=datadir,
File
"/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/softwareproperties/SoftwareProperties.py", line
109, in __init__
self.backup_sourceslist()
File
"/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/softwareproperties/SoftwareProperties.py", line
437, in backup_sourceslist
source_bkp = SourceEntry(line=source.line,file=source.file)
^^
File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/aptsources/sourceslist.py", line 509,
in __init__
raise ValueError("Classic SourceEntry cannot be written to .sources file")
ValueError: Classic SourceEntry cannot be written to .sources file
corrado@corrado-n4-nn-0215:~$
ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 24.04
Package: software-properties-gtk 0.99.42
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 6.6.0-14.14-generic 6.6.3
Uname: Linux 6.6.0-14-generic x86_64
ApportVersion: 2.27.0-0ubuntu6
Architecture: amd64
CasperMD5CheckResult: pass
CurrentDesktop: ubuntu:GNOME
Date: Thu Feb 15 10:07:43 2024
InstallationDate: Installed on 2024-02-15 (0 days ago)
InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 24.04 LTS "Noble Numbat" - Daily amd64 (20240215)
PackageArchitecture: all
ProcEnviron:
LANG=en_US.UTF-8
PATH=(custom, no user)
SHELL=/bin/bash
TERM=xterm-256color
XDG_RUNTIME_DIR=
SourcePackage: software-properties
UpgradeStatus: No upgrade log present (probably fresh install)
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/software-properties/+bug/2053228/+subscriptions
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2052951] Re: ncurses/i386 autopkgtest failure
This failed to build due to missing update-maintainer, I'm adding this and uploading it but wondering how it was tested: dpkg-source: info: using source format '3.0 (quilt)' dpkg-source: error: Version number suggests Ubuntu changes, but Maintainer: does not have Ubuntu address E: Failed to package source directory /home/jak/Projects/Ubuntu/Scratch/ncurses-6.4+20240113 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ncurses in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2052951 Title: ncurses/i386 autopkgtest failure Status in ncurses package in Ubuntu: New Bug description: ncurses fails to pass its autopkgtests on i386: https://objectstorage.prodstack5.canonical.com/swift/v1/AUTH_0f9aae918d5b4744bf7b827671c86842/autopkgtest- noble/noble/i386/n/ncurses/20240212_101858_8f6ad@/log.gz To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ncurses/+bug/2052951/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 1988819] Re: When apt keeps back packages due to phased updates, it should list them separately
2.7.11 is in proposed now. ** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu) Status: In Progress => Fix Committed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1988819 Title: When apt keeps back packages due to phased updates, it should list them separately Status in apt package in Ubuntu: Fix Committed Bug description: After phased updates have been introduced, it may happen that apt upgrade shows packages as upgradable but ends up not upgrading them. In this case the packages are indicated as being "kept back". Unfortunately, the feedback provided about this to the user is not very informative. The user sees the packages being kept back and thinks something is going wrong on the system. When packages are kept back because of phased updates, apt should say so e.g., it should say that the upgrade is delayed. Incidentally note that aptitude does not respect phased updates. ProblemType: Bug DistroRelease: Ubuntu 22.04 Package: apt 2.4.7 ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 5.15.0-47.51-generic 5.15.46 Uname: Linux 5.15.0-47-generic x86_64 ApportVersion: 2.20.11-0ubuntu82.1 Architecture: amd64 CasperMD5CheckResult: unknown CurrentDesktop: KDE Date: Tue Sep 6 10:05:14 2022 EcryptfsInUse: Yes InstallationDate: Installed on 2020-02-16 (933 days ago) InstallationMedia: Kubuntu 19.10 "Eoan Ermine" - Release amd64 (20191017) SourcePackage: apt UpgradeStatus: Upgraded to jammy on 2022-06-03 (94 days ago) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/1988819/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 1995790] Re: regression: ?garbage does not work correctly in install commands
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu Mantic) Status: Triaged => In Progress ** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu Jammy) Status: Triaged => In Progress ** Description changed: - The awesome apt has a some wonderful tips on their EXAMPLES section - (printed below). The choice of name to "garbage" might not have been the - best but the function is extremely useful. + [Impact] + The '?garbage' pattern doesn't work with install/remove commands which is confusing, and the fix for it is trivial. + + [Test plan] + Successful autopkgtest. The comprehensive test suite run as an autopkgtest has been updated in test/integration/test-apt-get-autoremove to test for the correct behavior of '?garbage' with install and remove. + + [Where problems could occur] + You can see we had to tweak the test suite in a bunch of places because it relies on exact debug output format and because we now call "markandsweep" there's additional mark flags in the debug output. It's unlikely that this is a problem for others. + + We have not seen regressions in noble in the past 2 weeks. + + [Original bug report] + The awesome apt has a some wonderful tips on their EXAMPLES section (printed below). The choice of name to "garbage" might not have been the best but the function is extremely useful. $ man apt-patterns | sed '/EXAMPLES/,/^[^ ]/!d;/^[^ ]/d' -apt remove ?garbage -Remove all packages that are automatically installed and no longer needed - -same as apt autoremove + apt remove ?garbage + Remove all packages that are automatically installed and no longer needed - + same as apt autoremove -apt purge ?config-files -Purge all packages that only have configuration files left + apt purge ?config-files + Purge all packages that only have configuration files left -apt list '~i !~M (~slibs|~sperl|~spython)' -List all manually-installed packages in sections matching libs, perl, or -python. + apt list '~i !~M (~slibs|~sperl|~spython)' + List all manually-installed packages in sections matching libs, perl, or + python. Lets mark a package as automatically installed, and use the examples. $ sudo apt-mark auto shotwell shotwell set to automatically installed. $ sudo apt remove ?garbage Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done Reading state information... Done The following packages were automatically installed and are no longer required: - libraw20 shotwell shotwell-common + libraw20 shotwell shotwell-common Use 'sudo apt autoremove' to remove them. 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded. - $ sudo apt autoremove + $ sudo apt autoremove Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done Reading state information... Done The following packages will be REMOVED: - libraw20 shotwell shotwell-common + libraw20 shotwell shotwell-common 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 3 to remove and 0 not upgraded. After this operation, 9.806 kB disk space will be freed. Do you want to continue? [Y/n] N Abort. Apt-patterns works as it should everywhere else, as far as I can see, it works wonders with ie `apt list '~g|~c'` and many other applications. I used `apt purge '~g|~c'` successfully in Ubuntu 20.04 for years, so I feel this is a regression. ProblemType: Bug DistroRelease: Ubuntu 22.04 Package: apt 2.4.8 ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 5.15.0-52.58-generic 5.15.60 Uname: Linux 5.15.0-52-generic x86_64 NonfreeKernelModules: zfs zunicode zavl icp zcommon znvpair ApportVersion: 2.20.11-0ubuntu82.1 Architecture: amd64 CasperMD5CheckResult: unknown CurrentDesktop: ubuntu:GNOME Date: Sun Nov 6 10:57:52 2022 SourcePackage: apt UpgradeStatus: Upgraded to jammy on 2022-03-26 (224 days ago) ** Description changed: [Impact] The '?garbage' pattern doesn't work with install/remove commands which is confusing, and the fix for it is trivial. [Test plan] Successful autopkgtest. The comprehensive test suite run as an autopkgtest has been updated in test/integration/test-apt-get-autoremove to test for the correct behavior of '?garbage' with install and remove. [Where problems could occur] You can see we had to tweak the test suite in a bunch of places because it relies on exact debug output format and because we now call "markandsweep" there's additional mark flags in the debug output. It's unlikely that this is a problem for others. - We have not seen regressions in noble in the past 2 weeks. + We have not seen regressions in noble in the past 2 weeks or noble- + proposed since 2023-11-23 (it was stuck for other reasons there), hence + other places the code change may affect have been thoroughly exercised + in the builders and autopkgtest runners. [Original bug report] The awesome apt has a some wonderful tips on
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2051181] Re: apt cannot upgrade phased updates if the current security version is same as updates
SRUs uploaded. Setting to Fix committed for internal tooling tracking needs (I understand normally SRUs should be In Progress, but then the tool reopens the task...) ** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu Mantic) Status: Triaged => Fix Committed ** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu Jammy) Status: Triaged => Fix Committed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2051181 Title: apt cannot upgrade phased updates if the current security version is same as updates Status in apt package in Ubuntu: Fix Committed Status in apt source package in Jammy: Fix Committed Status in apt source package in Mantic: Fix Committed Status in apt source package in Noble: Fix Committed Bug description: [Impact] A package that has the same version in -security and -updates, with the latter having a Phased-Update-Percentage set is subject to phasing which is not expected by the security team. [Test plan] An automatic test case has been added to apt's comprehensive integration test suite that simulates the problem. Passing of the autopkgtests is a successful test. [Where problems could occur] The fix in question changes the behavior, some people may have relied on that, but also this should not have happened server side (normally security updates do not receive a value but the real one in this case went a different route). Otherwise the fix is fairly contained, it removes a single OtherVer++ increment which made it go one version below the current version, so we do not expect any problems; setting aside the usual regression potential from bugs in the compiler and so on. [Original bug report] When I finished installation with Jammy 22.04.3, I noticed that nvidia-driver-535 cannot be upgrade by either `apt upgrade` nor `apt dist-upgrade`. Below is the log of apt upgrade: ubuntu@ubuntu:~$ sudo apt -o Debug::pkgProblemResolver=1 upgrade --dry-run [2/1878] Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done Reading state information... Done Entering ResolveByKeep 10% Dependencies are not satisfied for nvidia-driver-535:amd64 < 535.129.03-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 | 535.154.05-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 @ii pumH NPb Ib > Package nvidia-driver-535:amd64 nvidia-driver-535:amd64 Depends on nvidia-dkms-535:amd64 < none | 535.154.05-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 @un umH > (<= 535.129.03-1) Keeping Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 due to Depends Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1028.28+2 @ii umH Ib > Keeping package linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1028.28+2 @ii umH Ib > Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 Depends on linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 -> 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umU Ib > (= 6.1.0-1027.27) Keeping Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 due to Depends Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1028-oem:amd64 < none -> 6.1.0-1028.28+2 @un uN Ib > Keeping package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1028-oem:amd64 Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Keeping package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 Depends on linux-signatures-nvidia-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 -> 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umU > (= 6.1.0-1027.27) Keeping Package linux-signatures-nvidia-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 due to Depends Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 Depends on linux-objects-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 -> 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umU > (= 6.1.0-1027.27) Keeping Package linux-objects-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 due to Depends https://pastebin.canonical.com/p/7frwTKZG6D/ To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/2051181/+subscriptions -- Mailing list:
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2051181] Re: apt cannot upgrade phased updates if the current security version is same as updates
Also cherry-picked to the ubuntu/mantic and 2.4.y branches for mantic and jammy. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2051181 Title: apt cannot upgrade phased updates if the current security version is same as updates Status in apt package in Ubuntu: Fix Committed Status in apt source package in Jammy: Triaged Status in apt source package in Mantic: Triaged Status in apt source package in Noble: Fix Committed Bug description: [Impact] A package that has the same version in -security and -updates, with the latter having a Phased-Update-Percentage set is subject to phasing which is not expected by the security team. [Test plan] An automatic test case has been added to apt's comprehensive integration test suite that simulates the problem. Passing of the autopkgtests is a successful test. [Where problems could occur] The fix in question changes the behavior, some people may have relied on that, but also this should not have happened server side (normally security updates do not receive a value but the real one in this case went a different route). Otherwise the fix is fairly contained, it removes a single OtherVer++ increment which made it go one version below the current version, so we do not expect any problems; setting aside the usual regression potential from bugs in the compiler and so on. [Original bug report] When I finished installation with Jammy 22.04.3, I noticed that nvidia-driver-535 cannot be upgrade by either `apt upgrade` nor `apt dist-upgrade`. Below is the log of apt upgrade: ubuntu@ubuntu:~$ sudo apt -o Debug::pkgProblemResolver=1 upgrade --dry-run [2/1878] Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done Reading state information... Done Entering ResolveByKeep 10% Dependencies are not satisfied for nvidia-driver-535:amd64 < 535.129.03-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 | 535.154.05-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 @ii pumH NPb Ib > Package nvidia-driver-535:amd64 nvidia-driver-535:amd64 Depends on nvidia-dkms-535:amd64 < none | 535.154.05-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 @un umH > (<= 535.129.03-1) Keeping Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 due to Depends Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1028.28+2 @ii umH Ib > Keeping package linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1028.28+2 @ii umH Ib > Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 Depends on linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 -> 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umU Ib > (= 6.1.0-1027.27) Keeping Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 due to Depends Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1028-oem:amd64 < none -> 6.1.0-1028.28+2 @un uN Ib > Keeping package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1028-oem:amd64 Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Keeping package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 Depends on linux-signatures-nvidia-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 -> 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umU > (= 6.1.0-1027.27) Keeping Package linux-signatures-nvidia-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 due to Depends Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 Depends on linux-objects-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 -> 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umU > (= 6.1.0-1027.27) Keeping Package linux-objects-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 due to Depends https://pastebin.canonical.com/p/7frwTKZG6D/ To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/2051181/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2051181] Re: apt cannot upgrade phased updates if the current security version is same as updates
See https://salsa.debian.org/apt- team/apt/-/commit/26e0e9b76fb06afe5250eeb8e5b3d069d4793432 for the fix ** Also affects: apt (Ubuntu Mantic) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Also affects: apt (Ubuntu Jammy) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Also affects: apt (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: Critical Assignee: Julian Andres Klode (juliank) Status: Fix Committed ** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu Mantic) Status: New => Triaged ** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu Jammy) Status: New => Triaged -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2051181 Title: apt cannot upgrade phased updates if the current security version is same as updates Status in apt package in Ubuntu: Fix Committed Status in apt source package in Jammy: Triaged Status in apt source package in Mantic: Triaged Status in apt source package in Noble: Fix Committed Bug description: [Impact] A package that has the same version in -security and -updates, with the latter having a Phased-Update-Percentage set is subject to phasing which is not expected by the security team. [Test plan] An automatic test case has been added to apt's comprehensive integration test suite that simulates the problem. Passing of the autopkgtests is a successful test. [Where problems could occur] The fix in question changes the behavior, some people may have relied on that, but also this should not have happened server side (normally security updates do not receive a value but the real one in this case went a different route). Otherwise the fix is fairly contained, it removes a single OtherVer++ increment which made it go one version below the current version, so we do not expect any problems; setting aside the usual regression potential from bugs in the compiler and so on. [Original bug report] When I finished installation with Jammy 22.04.3, I noticed that nvidia-driver-535 cannot be upgrade by either `apt upgrade` nor `apt dist-upgrade`. Below is the log of apt upgrade: ubuntu@ubuntu:~$ sudo apt -o Debug::pkgProblemResolver=1 upgrade --dry-run [2/1878] Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done Reading state information... Done Entering ResolveByKeep 10% Dependencies are not satisfied for nvidia-driver-535:amd64 < 535.129.03-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 | 535.154.05-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 @ii pumH NPb Ib > Package nvidia-driver-535:amd64 nvidia-driver-535:amd64 Depends on nvidia-dkms-535:amd64 < none | 535.154.05-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 @un umH > (<= 535.129.03-1) Keeping Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 due to Depends Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1028.28+2 @ii umH Ib > Keeping package linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1028.28+2 @ii umH Ib > Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 Depends on linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 -> 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umU Ib > (= 6.1.0-1027.27) Keeping Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 due to Depends Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1028-oem:amd64 < none -> 6.1.0-1028.28+2 @un uN Ib > Keeping package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1028-oem:amd64 Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Keeping package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 Depends on linux-signatures-nvidia-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 -> 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umU > (= 6.1.0-1027.27) Keeping Package linux-signatures-nvidia-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 due to Depends Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 Depends on linux-objects-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 -> 6.1.0-1027.27
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2051181] Re: apt cannot upgrade phased updates if the current security version is same as updates
Fixed in apt git. ** Summary changed: - apt cannot upgrade packages if the current security version is same as updates + apt cannot upgrade phased updates if the current security version is same as updates ** Description changed: - When I finished installation with Jammy 22.04.3, I noticed that nvidia- - driver-535 cannot be upgrade by either `apt upgrade` nor `apt dist- - upgrade`. + [Impact] + A package that has the same version in -security and -updates, with the latter having a Phased-Update-Percentage set is subject to phasing which is not expected by the security team. + + [Test plan] + An automatic test case has been added to apt's comprehensive integration test suite that simulates the problem. Passing of the autopkgtests is a successful test. + + [Where problems could occur] + The fix in question changes the behavior, some people may have relied on that, but also this should not have happened server side (normally security updates do not receive a value but the real one in this case went a different route). + + Otherwise the fix is fairly contained, it removes a single OtherVer++ + increment which made it go one version below the current version, so we + do not expect any problems; setting aside the usual regression potential + from bugs in the compiler and so on. + + [Original bug report] + When I finished installation with Jammy 22.04.3, I noticed that nvidia-driver-535 cannot be upgrade by either `apt upgrade` nor `apt dist-upgrade`. Below is the log of apt upgrade: ubuntu@ubuntu:~$ sudo apt -o Debug::pkgProblemResolver=1 upgrade --dry-run [2/1878] - Reading package lists... Done - Building dependency tree... Done + Reading package lists... Done + Building dependency tree... Done Reading state information... Done Entering ResolveByKeep 10% - Dependencies are not satisfied for nvidia-driver-535:amd64 < 535.129.03-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 | 535.154.05-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 @ii pumH NPb Ib > + Dependencies are not satisfied for nvidia-driver-535:amd64 < 535.129.03-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 | 535.154.05-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 @ii pumH NPb Ib > Package nvidia-driver-535:amd64 nvidia-driver-535:amd64 Depends on nvidia-dkms-535:amd64 < none | 535.154.05-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 @un umH > (<= 535.129.03-1) - Keeping Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 due to Depends - Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1028.28+2 @ii umH Ib > + Keeping Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 due to Depends + Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1028.28+2 @ii umH Ib > Keeping package linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 - Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1028.28+2 @ii umH Ib > + Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1028.28+2 @ii umH Ib > Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 Depends on linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 -> 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umU Ib > (= 6.1.0-1027.27) - Keeping Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 due to Depends - Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1028-oem:amd64 < none -> 6.1.0-1028.28+2 @un uN Ib > + Keeping Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 due to Depends + Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1028-oem:amd64 < none -> 6.1.0-1028.28+2 @un uN Ib > Keeping package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1028-oem:amd64 - Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > + Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Keeping package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 - Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > + Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 Depends on linux-signatures-nvidia-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 -> 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umU > (= 6.1.0-1027.27) - Keeping Package
[Touch-packages] [Bug 1988819] Re: When apt keeps back packages due to phased updates, it should list them separately
Proposed fix in: https://salsa.debian.org/apt- team/apt/-/merge_requests/327/diffs?commit_id=483e3b5c49762306c0a9f54117fd70cff43af4be The corner case with kept back packages not due to phasing ends up with a notice before the prompt: Reading package lists... Building dependency tree... Calculating upgrade... The following NEW packages will be installed: phased-new The following updates have been deferred due to phasing: phased phased-dep phased-depends-ready-dep The following packages have been kept back: depends-phased-dep ready-dep The following packages will be upgraded: depends-phased-new phased-security 2 upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 to remove and 5 not upgraded. Need to get 0 B/126 B of archives. After this operation, 43.0 kB of additional disk space will be used. N: Some packages may have been kept back due to phasing. Do you want to continue? [Y/n] There may be a nicer way to do this. ** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu) Status: Triaged => In Progress -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1988819 Title: When apt keeps back packages due to phased updates, it should list them separately Status in apt package in Ubuntu: In Progress Bug description: After phased updates have been introduced, it may happen that apt upgrade shows packages as upgradable but ends up not upgrading them. In this case the packages are indicated as being "kept back". Unfortunately, the feedback provided about this to the user is not very informative. The user sees the packages being kept back and thinks something is going wrong on the system. When packages are kept back because of phased updates, apt should say so e.g., it should say that the upgrade is delayed. Incidentally note that aptitude does not respect phased updates. ProblemType: Bug DistroRelease: Ubuntu 22.04 Package: apt 2.4.7 ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 5.15.0-47.51-generic 5.15.46 Uname: Linux 5.15.0-47-generic x86_64 ApportVersion: 2.20.11-0ubuntu82.1 Architecture: amd64 CasperMD5CheckResult: unknown CurrentDesktop: KDE Date: Tue Sep 6 10:05:14 2022 EcryptfsInUse: Yes InstallationDate: Installed on 2020-02-16 (933 days ago) InstallationMedia: Kubuntu 19.10 "Eoan Ermine" - Release amd64 (20191017) SourcePackage: apt UpgradeStatus: Upgraded to jammy on 2022-06-03 (94 days ago) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/1988819/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2051181] Re: apt cannot upgrade packages if the current security version is same as updates
** Tags added: foundations-todo ** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided => Critical ** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu) Assignee: (unassigned) => Julian Andres Klode (juliank) ** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu) Status: New => In Progress ** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu) Status: In Progress => Triaged -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2051181 Title: apt cannot upgrade packages if the current security version is same as updates Status in apt package in Ubuntu: Triaged Bug description: When I finished installation with Jammy 22.04.3, I noticed that nvidia-driver-535 cannot be upgrade by either `apt upgrade` nor `apt dist-upgrade`. Below is the log of apt upgrade: ubuntu@ubuntu:~$ sudo apt -o Debug::pkgProblemResolver=1 upgrade --dry-run [2/1878] Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done Reading state information... Done Entering ResolveByKeep 10% Dependencies are not satisfied for nvidia-driver-535:amd64 < 535.129.03-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 | 535.154.05-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 @ii pumH NPb Ib > Package nvidia-driver-535:amd64 nvidia-driver-535:amd64 Depends on nvidia-dkms-535:amd64 < none | 535.154.05-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 @un umH > (<= 535.129.03-1) Keeping Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 due to Depends Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1028.28+2 @ii umH Ib > Keeping package linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1028.28+2 @ii umH Ib > Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 linux-modules-nvidia-535-oem-22.04c:amd64 Depends on linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 -> 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umU Ib > (= 6.1.0-1027.27) Keeping Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 due to Depends Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1028-oem:amd64 < none -> 6.1.0-1028.28+2 @un uN Ib > Keeping package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1028-oem:amd64 Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Keeping package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 Depends on linux-signatures-nvidia-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 -> 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umU > (= 6.1.0-1027.27) Keeping Package linux-signatures-nvidia-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 due to Depends Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Dependencies are not satisfied for linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 | 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umH Ib > Package linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 linux-modules-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 Depends on linux-objects-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 < 6.1.0-1027.27 -> 6.1.0-1027.27+1 @ii umU > (= 6.1.0-1027.27) Keeping Package linux-objects-nvidia-535-6.1.0-1027-oem:amd64 due to Depends https://pastebin.canonical.com/p/7frwTKZG6D/ To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/2051181/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 1995790] Re: regression: ?garbage does not work correctly in install commands
** Tags removed: foundations-todo -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1995790 Title: regression: ?garbage does not work correctly in install commands Status in apt package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in apt source package in Jammy: Triaged Status in apt source package in Lunar: Won't Fix Status in apt source package in Mantic: Triaged Status in apt source package in Noble: Fix Released Bug description: The awesome apt has a some wonderful tips on their EXAMPLES section (printed below). The choice of name to "garbage" might not have been the best but the function is extremely useful. $ man apt-patterns | sed '/EXAMPLES/,/^[^ ]/!d;/^[^ ]/d' apt remove ?garbage Remove all packages that are automatically installed and no longer needed - same as apt autoremove apt purge ?config-files Purge all packages that only have configuration files left apt list '~i !~M (~slibs|~sperl|~spython)' List all manually-installed packages in sections matching libs, perl, or python. Lets mark a package as automatically installed, and use the examples. $ sudo apt-mark auto shotwell shotwell set to automatically installed. $ sudo apt remove ?garbage Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done Reading state information... Done The following packages were automatically installed and are no longer required: libraw20 shotwell shotwell-common Use 'sudo apt autoremove' to remove them. 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded. $ sudo apt autoremove Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done Reading state information... Done The following packages will be REMOVED: libraw20 shotwell shotwell-common 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 3 to remove and 0 not upgraded. After this operation, 9.806 kB disk space will be freed. Do you want to continue? [Y/n] N Abort. Apt-patterns works as it should everywhere else, as far as I can see, it works wonders with ie `apt list '~g|~c'` and many other applications. I used `apt purge '~g|~c'` successfully in Ubuntu 20.04 for years, so I feel this is a regression. ProblemType: Bug DistroRelease: Ubuntu 22.04 Package: apt 2.4.8 ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 5.15.0-52.58-generic 5.15.60 Uname: Linux 5.15.0-52-generic x86_64 NonfreeKernelModules: zfs zunicode zavl icp zcommon znvpair ApportVersion: 2.20.11-0ubuntu82.1 Architecture: amd64 CasperMD5CheckResult: unknown CurrentDesktop: ubuntu:GNOME Date: Sun Nov 6 10:57:52 2022 SourcePackage: apt UpgradeStatus: Upgraded to jammy on 2022-03-26 (224 days ago) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/1995790/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2051512] Re: apport ftbfs with Python 3.12 as the default
** Tags removed: rls-nn-incoming ** Tags added: foundations-todo ** Also affects: apport (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: High Status: Confirmed ** Also affects: python3-defaults (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: Undecided Status: New -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to python3-defaults in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2051512 Title: apport ftbfs with Python 3.12 as the default Status in apport package in Ubuntu: Confirmed Status in python3-defaults package in Ubuntu: New Status in apport source package in Noble: Confirmed Status in python3-defaults source package in Noble: New Bug description: debian/rules override_dh_auto_test make[1]: Entering directory '/<>' tests/run-linters --errors-only Skipping mypy tests, mypy is not installed Running pylint... * Module apport-retrace bin/apport-retrace:577:44: E0601: Using variable 'crashid' before assignment (used-before-assignment) make[1]: *** [debian/rules:23: override_dh_auto_test] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory '/<>' make: *** [debian/rules:4: binary] Error 2 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apport/+bug/2051512/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2052297] [NEW] Please add opt.keybase.keybase profile
Public bug reported:
Like the other Chrome binaries, Keybase also needs a profile:
abi ,
/opt/keybase/Keybase flags=(unconfined) {
allow userns create,
}
Keybase is heavily used for security and boot engineering for cross-vendor
communication and broken without it
** 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.launchpad.net/bugs/2052297
Title:
Please add opt.keybase.keybase profile
Status in apparmor package in Ubuntu:
New
Bug description:
Like the other Chrome binaries, Keybase also needs a profile:
abi ,
/opt/keybase/Keybase flags=(unconfined) {
allow userns create,
}
Keybase is heavily used for security and boot engineering for cross-vendor
communication and broken without it
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apparmor/+bug/2052297/+subscriptions
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2051541] Re: unattended-upgrades ftbfs with Python 3.12 as default
** Tags removed: ftbfs rls-nn-incoming ** Tags added: foundations-todo ** Also affects: unattended-upgrades (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: High Status: Confirmed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to unattended-upgrades in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2051541 Title: unattended-upgrades ftbfs with Python 3.12 as default Status in unattended-upgrades package in Ubuntu: Confirmed Status in unattended-upgrades source package in Noble: Confirmed Bug description: [...] Running ./test_pep484.py with python3 s -- Ran 0 tests in 0.000s NO TESTS RAN (skipped=1) make[2]: *** [Makefile:9: check] Error 5 make[2]: Leaving directory '/<>/test' make[1]: *** [debian/rules:16: override_dh_auto_test] Error 2 5 is a new exit value when all tests are skipped. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unattended-upgrades/+bug/2051541/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2045455] Re: add-apt-repository crashed with --- in _request()
Nevermind, a non-existent or private PPA has been tried to add and software-properties should properly surface the error to you. ** Changed in: software-properties (Ubuntu) Status: Incomplete => Triaged ** Tags removed: rls-nn-incoming ** Tags added: foundations-todo ** Also affects: software-properties (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: Medium Status: Triaged -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to software-properties in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2045455 Title: add-apt-repository crashed with --- in _request() Status in software-properties package in Ubuntu: Triaged Status in software-properties source package in Noble: Triaged Bug description: Error encountered during first boot after installing ubuntu-unity- desktop on Live Server 24.04 Daily Build. ProblemType: Crash DistroRelease: Ubuntu 24.04 Package: software-properties-common 0.99.40 ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 6.5.0-9.9-generic 6.5.3 Uname: Linux 6.5.0-9-generic x86_64 ApportVersion: 2.27.0-0ubuntu6 Architecture: amd64 CasperMD5CheckResult: pass Date: Thu Nov 30 02:20:48 2023 ExecutablePath: /usr/bin/add-apt-repository InstallationDate: Installed on 2023-11-30 (2 days ago) InstallationMedia: Ubuntu-Server 24.04 "Noble Numbat" - Daily amd64 (20231129) InterpreterPath: /usr/bin/python3.11 PackageArchitecture: all ProcCmdline: /usr/bin/python3 /usr/bin/add-apt-repository ppa:relan/exfat -y ProcEnviron: LANG=C.UTF-8 PATH=(custom, no user) SHELL=/bin/bash TERM=linux Python3Details: /usr/bin/python3.11, Python 3.11.6, python3-minimal, 3.11.4-5 PythonArgs: ['/usr/bin/add-apt-repository', 'ppa:relan/exfat', '-y'] PythonDetails: N/A SourcePackage: software-properties Title: add-apt-repository crashed with --- in _request() UpgradeStatus: No upgrade log present (probably fresh install) UserGroups: N/A To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/software-properties/+bug/2045455/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2045455] Re: add-apt-repository crashed with --- in _request()
Presumably the add-apt-repository command failed while trying to add a private PPA here due to you not being authorized to access it (maybe not logged in?), can you tell us which PPA did you try to add? ** Changed in: software-properties (Ubuntu) Status: New => Incomplete -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to software-properties in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2045455 Title: add-apt-repository crashed with --- in _request() Status in software-properties package in Ubuntu: Triaged Status in software-properties source package in Noble: Triaged Bug description: Error encountered during first boot after installing ubuntu-unity- desktop on Live Server 24.04 Daily Build. ProblemType: Crash DistroRelease: Ubuntu 24.04 Package: software-properties-common 0.99.40 ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 6.5.0-9.9-generic 6.5.3 Uname: Linux 6.5.0-9-generic x86_64 ApportVersion: 2.27.0-0ubuntu6 Architecture: amd64 CasperMD5CheckResult: pass Date: Thu Nov 30 02:20:48 2023 ExecutablePath: /usr/bin/add-apt-repository InstallationDate: Installed on 2023-11-30 (2 days ago) InstallationMedia: Ubuntu-Server 24.04 "Noble Numbat" - Daily amd64 (20231129) InterpreterPath: /usr/bin/python3.11 PackageArchitecture: all ProcCmdline: /usr/bin/python3 /usr/bin/add-apt-repository ppa:relan/exfat -y ProcEnviron: LANG=C.UTF-8 PATH=(custom, no user) SHELL=/bin/bash TERM=linux Python3Details: /usr/bin/python3.11, Python 3.11.6, python3-minimal, 3.11.4-5 PythonArgs: ['/usr/bin/add-apt-repository', 'ppa:relan/exfat', '-y'] PythonDetails: N/A SourcePackage: software-properties Title: add-apt-repository crashed with --- in _request() UpgradeStatus: No upgrade log present (probably fresh install) UserGroups: N/A To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/software-properties/+bug/2045455/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2050033] Re: gettext: msgfmt --java2 does not support Java 21
Unsubscribing ubuntu sponsors as already subscribed to the merge -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to gettext in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2050033 Title: gettext: msgfmt --java2 does not support Java 21 Status in gettext package in Ubuntu: New Status in gettext package in Debian: New Bug description: When building 'ssl-utils-clojure' package with Java 21 as default, the build fails with the following trace: -- Applying task i18n to [make] Running 'make i18n' make[1]: *** [debian/rules:19: override_dh_auto_build] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory '/<>' make: *** [debian/rules:12: binary] Error 2 dpkg-buildpackage: error: debian/rules binary subprocess returned exit status 2 -- Running make in the build chroot produces the following error: --- msgfmt --java2 -d resources -r puppetlabs.ssl_utils.Messages -l eo locales/eo.po msgfmt: Java compiler not found, try installing gcj or set $JAVAC msgfmt: compilation of Java class failed, please try --verbose or set $JAVAC make: *** [dev-resources/Makefile.i18n:94: resources/puppetlabs/ssl_utils/Messages_eo.class] Error 1 --- It appears that gettext package does not support Java 21. Note: gettext 0.22.4 refactors Java support. This delta can be safely dropped after a new upstream release. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gettext/+bug/2050033/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2049540] Re: hundreds of differences in module list between initramfs-tools version 0.142ubuntu10 and version 0.142ubuntu11
** Tags removed: rls-nn-incoming ** Tags added: foundations-todo ** Also affects: initramfs-tools (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Changed in: initramfs-tools (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided => Critical ** Changed in: initramfs-tools (Ubuntu) Importance: Critical => High ** Changed in: initramfs-tools (Ubuntu) Status: New => Triaged -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to initramfs-tools in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2049540 Title: hundreds of differences in module list between initramfs-tools version 0.142ubuntu10 and version 0.142ubuntu11 Status in initramfs-tools package in Ubuntu: Triaged Status in initramfs-tools source package in Noble: Triaged Bug description: When analyzing the kernel modules present in the current initrd, I have found that there are hundreds of such differences, and that this started with the move to dracut. I believe that the move to dracut was intended to be relatively module neutral - see LP: #2031841 and LP: #2042710 for more details on that. I'm attaching here a test case based on podman, where different versions of the initramfs-tools package are installed, and then the list of modules present in the initrd is analyzed. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/initramfs-tools/+bug/2049540/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2049529] Re: Extra ZFS-related log line with `useradd -m -R /path`
** Tags removed: rls-nn-incoming ** Tags added: foundations-todo ** Also affects: shadow (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: Undecided Status: New -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to shadow in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2049529 Title: Extra ZFS-related log line with `useradd -m -R /path` Status in shadow package in Ubuntu: New Status in shadow source package in Noble: New Bug description: Hi, I was digging into fixing `autopkgtest`'s `unshare` testsuite, and the rabbit hole led me here. Here is a very quick reproducer, first: Start a fresh Ubuntu VM. Here is a quick path, but other ways should do fine: ``` $ cd /tmp $ autopkgtest-buildvm-ubuntu-cloud -a amd64 -r noble $ kvm -m 1G -snapshot -hda autopkgtest-noble-amd64.img ``` Now in the VM: ``` $ sudo apt install -y mmdebstrap $ mmdebstrap noble /tmp/rootfs [...] $ sudo useradd --create-home --root /tmp/rootfs user1 can't open /dev/null: No such file or directory ``` The line `can't open /dev/null: No such file or directory` is printed on `stderr`, and that's unexpected by the part of the code I was debugging in the first place. Digging a bit led me to that line that does the printing: https://git.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/shadow/tree/debian/patches/1015_add_zsys_support.patch#n69 There seem to me that there are multiple issues with that patch: * Why try to call `zsysctl` in every case without first checking that it would be relevant: ZFS is not even installed on the VM we just created, less alone it has any ZFS volume/pool/whatever. * Obviously, when creating a user in a `chroot`, `/dev/null` won't exist unless mapped, and `useradd` is perfectly aware of that, because it even does the `chroot` call itself! But why even try to mess with ZFS in the `chroot` case in the first place? From what history @brian-murray told me, this patch was part of some ZFS experimentation in the past. Maybe that experimentation is now finished, and that patch could be dropped? At the very least it needs improvements, imho. EDIT: Just for context on why this issue appears only now: I was trying to fix the `unshare` testsuite in `autopkgtest`, which is pretty recent (2022) (https://salsa.debian.org/ci- team/autopkgtest/-/commit/d1671f94f68bce9a0c6793310a9f8b79b4e919a5) even upstream on Debian, and has never worked yet on Ubuntu. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/shadow/+bug/2049529/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 1838372] Re: 'ubuntu-bug -w' doesn't work under wayland
** Tags removed: rls-nn-incoming -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apport in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1838372 Title: 'ubuntu-bug -w' doesn't work under wayland Status in apport package in Ubuntu: Triaged Bug description: 'ubuntu-bug -w' doesn't work for most applications such nautilus, gedit, settings, etc. under wayland. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apport/+bug/1838372/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 1838372] Re: 'ubuntu-bug -w' doesn't work under wayland
Needs some investigation whether this is possible, Wayland has a security focused design where I'd expect it not to be. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apport in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1838372 Title: 'ubuntu-bug -w' doesn't work under wayland Status in apport package in Ubuntu: Triaged Bug description: 'ubuntu-bug -w' doesn't work for most applications such nautilus, gedit, settings, etc. under wayland. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apport/+bug/1838372/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 1728616] Re: using 'devel' in sources.list causes apt-get update to fail
We need to add some Aliases field(s) to release files to allow matching that, but that may be hard to do fully correctly. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1728616 Title: using 'devel' in sources.list causes apt-get update to fail Status in apt package in Ubuntu: Opinion Bug description: Our /etc/apt/sources.list looks like this: $ cat /etc/apt/sources.list | deb http://archive.ubuntu.com//ubuntu devel main restricted universe multiverse | deb http://archive.ubuntu.com//ubuntu devel-updates main restricted universe multiverse | deb http://archive.ubuntu.com//ubuntu devel-security main restricted universe multiverse | deb http://archive.ubuntu.com//ubuntu devel-backports main restricted universe multiverse I noticed today that 'apt-get update' started failing. Likely that started on Thursday or Friday when bionic opened. This seems less than desireable, but even if the failure is expected, what is the solution to "accept" this change? It does mention 'apt-secure(8)' but nothing there obviously points to the solution. $ sudo apt-get update Hit:2 http://ppa.launchpad.net/uvtool-dev/master/ubuntu devel InRelease Get:1 http://archive.ubuntu.com//ubuntu devel InRelease [235 kB] Get:3 http://archive.ubuntu.com//ubuntu devel-updates InRelease [65.4 kB] Get:4 http://archive.ubuntu.com//ubuntu devel-security InRelease [65.4 kB] Get:5 http://archive.ubuntu.com//ubuntu devel-backports InRelease [65.5 kB] Reading package lists... Done W: Conflicting distribution: http://ppa.launchpad.net/uvtool-dev/master/ubuntu devel InRelease (expected devel but got zesty) W: Conflicting distribution: http://archive.ubuntu.com//ubuntu devel InRelease (expected devel but got bionic) N: Repository 'http://archive.ubuntu.com//ubuntu devel InRelease' changed its 'Version' value from '17.10' to '18.04' E: Repository 'http://archive.ubuntu.com//ubuntu devel InRelease' changed its 'Suite' value from 'artful' to 'bionic' E: Repository 'http://archive.ubuntu.com//ubuntu devel InRelease' changed its 'Codename' value from 'artful' to 'bionic' N: This must be accepted explicitly before updates for this repository can be applied. See apt-secure(8) manpage for details. W: Conflicting distribution: http://archive.ubuntu.com//ubuntu devel-updates InRelease (expected devel-updates but got bionic) N: Repository 'http://archive.ubuntu.com//ubuntu devel-updates InRelease' changed its 'Version' value from '17.10' to '18.04' E: Repository 'http://archive.ubuntu.com//ubuntu devel-updates InRelease' changed its 'Suite' value from 'artful-updates' to 'bionic-updates' E: Repository 'http://archive.ubuntu.com//ubuntu devel-updates InRelease' changed its 'Codename' value from 'artful' to 'bionic' N: This must be accepted explicitly before updates for this repository can be applied. See apt-secure(8) manpage for details. W: Conflicting distribution: http://archive.ubuntu.com//ubuntu devel-security InRelease (expected devel-security but got bionic) N: Repository 'http://archive.ubuntu.com//ubuntu devel-security InRelease' changed its 'Version' value from '17.10' to '18.04' E: Repository 'http://archive.ubuntu.com//ubuntu devel-security InRelease' changed its 'Suite' value from 'artful-security' to 'bionic-security' E: Repository 'http://archive.ubuntu.com//ubuntu devel-security InRelease' changed its 'Codename' value from 'artful' to 'bionic' N: This must be accepted explicitly before updates for this repository can be applied. See apt-secure(8) manpage for details. W: Conflicting distribution: http://archive.ubuntu.com//ubuntu devel-backports InRelease (expected devel-backports but got bionic) N: Repository 'http://archive.ubuntu.com//ubuntu devel-backports InRelease' changed its 'Version' value from '17.10' to '18.04' E: Repository 'http://archive.ubuntu.com//ubuntu devel-backports InRelease' changed its 'Suite' value from 'artful-backports' to 'bionic-backports' E: Repository 'http://archive.ubuntu.com//ubuntu devel-backports InRelease' changed its 'Codename' value from 'artful' to 'bionic' N: This must be accepted explicitly before updates for this repository can be applied. See apt-secure(8) manpage for details. ProblemType: Bug DistroRelease: Ubuntu 17.10 Package: apt 1.5 ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 4.12.0-11.12-generic 4.12.5 Uname: Linux 4.12.0-11-generic x86_64 NonfreeKernelModules: zfs zunicode zavl zcommon znvpair ApportVersion: 2.20.7-0ubuntu3 Architecture: amd64 Date: Mon Oct 30 14:37:22 2017 JournalErrors: Hint: You are currently not seeing messages from other users and the system. Users in groups 'adm', 'systemd-journal' can see all messages. Pass -q to turn off this notice. -- Logs begin at Mon 2017-01-30 21:40:08
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2047453] Re: Error message missing compared to `apt-get update`
You'll have to investigate the individual items to see why it failed. It's generally not advisable to use the "apt" module as it is badly abstracted, use "apt_pkg" instead. ** Changed in: python-apt (Ubuntu) Status: New => Invalid -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to python-apt in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2047453 Title: Error message missing compared to `apt-get update` Status in python-apt package in Ubuntu: Invalid Bug description: Assuming there is no package server running on `localhost`: ``` $ echo 'deb [trusted=yes] http://localhost:8000/ bogus-test-repo main' | sudo tee /etc/apt/sources.list.d/placeholder-test-repo.list ``` and then ``` $ python -c "import apt; c = apt.Cache(); c.update()" Traceback (most recent call last): File "", line 1, in File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/apt/cache.py", line 575, in update raise FetchFailedException() apt.cache.FetchFailedException ``` and compare with ``` $ sudo apt-get update Ign:1 http://localhost:8000 bogus-test-repo InRelease Hit:2 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy InRelease Hit:3 http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-security InRelease Hit:4 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates InRelease Hit:5 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-backports InRelease Ign:1 http://localhost:8000 bogus-test-repo InRelease Ign:1 http://localhost:8000 bogus-test-repo InRelease Err:1 http://localhost:8000 bogus-test-repo InRelease Could not connect to localhost:8000 (127.0.0.1). - connect (111: Connection refused) Reading package lists... Done W: Failed to fetch http://localhost:8000/dists/bogus-test-repo/InRelease Could not connect to localhost:8000 (127.0.0.1). - connect (111: Connection refused) W: Some index files failed to download. They have been ignored, or old ones used instead. ``` I expected the Python `apt` interface to produce a similar or identical error message. ``` # lsb_release -rd Description:Ubuntu 22.04.3 LTS Release:22.04 # apt-cache policy python3-apt python3-apt: Installed: 2.4.0ubuntu2 Candidate: 2.4.0ubuntu2 Version table: *** 2.4.0ubuntu2 500 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-updates/main amd64 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status 2.3.0ubuntu2 500 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main amd64 Packages ``` To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python-apt/+bug/2047453/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2046356] Re: Update URL for Support information in MOTD message
Dropping the foundations-todo task as we expect debdiffs to sponsor to be provided by Lucas. I expect the patch pilot program to handle this quickly, but please do fill out the SRU template in the bug description. ** Tags removed: foundations-todo -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to base-files in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2046356 Title: Update URL for Support information in MOTD message Status in base-files package in Ubuntu: New Status in base-files source package in Xenial: New Status in base-files source package in Bionic: New Status in base-files source package in Focal: New Status in base-files source package in Jammy: New Status in base-files source package in Mantic: New Status in base-files source package in Noble: New Bug description: On the file 10-help-text, we are printing the following line on MOTD: * Support: https://ubuntu.com/advantage We should update the url to https://ubuntu.com/pro instead, as this will the default url for support information now To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/base-files/+bug/2046356/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2046356] Re: Update URL for Support information in MOTD message
** Tags removed: rls-nn-incoming ** Tags added: foundations-todo -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to base-files in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2046356 Title: Update URL for Support information in MOTD message Status in base-files package in Ubuntu: New Status in base-files source package in Xenial: New Status in base-files source package in Bionic: New Status in base-files source package in Focal: New Status in base-files source package in Jammy: New Status in base-files source package in Mantic: New Status in base-files source package in Noble: New Bug description: On the file 10-help-text, we are printing the following line on MOTD: * Support: https://ubuntu.com/advantage We should update the url to https://ubuntu.com/pro instead, as this will the default url for support information now To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/base-files/+bug/2046356/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2022927] Re: Busybox mount fails to mount Snaps
I agree that this patch should be shipped but if upstream doesn't accept it we also would have no way to drop it again without breaking users, so this seems risky. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to busybox in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2022927 Title: Busybox mount fails to mount Snaps Status in busybox package in Ubuntu: New Bug description: Snapd tries to mount squashfs Snaps with non-standard mount flags like "x-gdu.hide" and "x-gvfs-hide", both of which are used to indicate to userspace programs that a given mount should not be shown in a list of mounted partitions/filesystems. Busybox does not support these flags, and so fails with "Invalid argument". $ sudo busybox mount -t tmpfs -o x-gdu-hide test /tmp/test mount: mounting test on /tmp/test failed: Invalid argument These flags can likely be be safely ignored, as they don't actually affect the functionality of the mount. This goes for all mount options starting with "x-", as these generally denote non-standard mount option "extensions". I've created a patch against Busybox which adds an optional configuration item to ignore all mount options beginning with "x-". An additional verbose option has also been added to enable the ability to report that the mount flags have been ignored, rather than silently ignoring them. This is a requirement for a customer project, where we are limited to using Busybox (due to coreutils' GPL-3.0 licence) but would also require using Snaps like checkbox for testing and verification. This was posted on the Busybox mailing list a few months ago (http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2023-March/090202.html) but patch acceptance there seems to take quite a long time, and we need this for the customer. A PPA containing the patched Busybox version is available on the project's Launchpad team: https://launchpad.net/~nemos- team/+archive/ubuntu/ppa To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/busybox/+bug/2022927/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2044104] Re: [UBUNTU 20.04] chzdev -e is rebuilding initramfs even with zdev:early=0 set
** Tags removed: rls-ff-incoming rls-jj-incoming ** Tags added: foundations-todo ** Also affects: s390-tools (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: Medium Assignee: Skipper Bug Screeners (skipper-screen-team) Status: New ** Also affects: initramfs-tools (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: Medium Status: New -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to initramfs-tools in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2044104 Title: [UBUNTU 20.04] chzdev -e is rebuilding initramfs even with zdev:early=0 set Status in Ubuntu on IBM z Systems: New Status in initramfs-tools package in Ubuntu: New Status in s390-tools package in Ubuntu: New Status in initramfs-tools source package in Noble: New Status in s390-tools source package in Noble: New Bug description: Versions: Ubuntu 20.04.5 s390-tools version 2.12.0-0ubuntu3.7.s390x Ubuntu 22.04.2 s390-tools version 2.20.0-0ubuntu3.2.s390x When I configure a zfcp LUN persistently via chzdev, the initrd is being rebuilt even with parameter zdev:early=0 root@a8315003:~# chzdev -e zfcp-lun 0.0.1803:0x500507630910d430:0x40194092 zdev:early=0 zFCP LUN 0.0.1803:0x500507630910d430:0x40194092 configured Note: The initial RAM-disk must be updated for these changes to take effect: - zFCP LUN 0.0.1803:0x500507630910d430:0x40194092 update-initramfs: Generating /boot/initrd.img-5.15.0-60-generic I: The initramfs will attempt to resume from /dev/dasdb1 I: (UUID=e70ecb80-4d1e-4074-9cda-ce231ad6e698) I: Set the RESUME variable to override this. Using config file '/etc/zipl.conf' Building bootmap in '/boot' Adding IPL section 'ubuntu' (default) Preparing boot device: dasda (c00a). Done. root@a8315003:~# == Comment: - Thorsten Diehl - 2023-03-01 06:55:47 == @BOE-dev This behaviour is unexpected. https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/linux-on-systems?topic=commands-chzdev says: Activating a device early during the boot process Use the zdev:early device attribute to activate a device early during the boot process and to override any existing auto-configuration with a persistent device configuration. zdev:early=1 The device is activated during the initial RAM disc phase according to the persistent configuration. zdev:early=0 The device is activated as usual during the boot process. This is the default. If auto-configuration data is present, the device is activated during the initial RAM disc phase according to the auto-configuration. I can't interprete a SCSI LUN as a device with auto configuration data. (At least, if the zfcp device hasn't NPIV enabled) == Comment: #5 - Peter Oberparleiter - 2023-03-01 11:18:28 == (In reply to comment #2) > @BOE-dev > This behaviour is unexpected. > https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/linux-on-systems?topic=commands-chzdev says: > Activating a device early during the boot process > > Use the zdev:early device attribute to activate a device early during the > boot process and to override any existing auto-configuration with a > persistent device configuration. > > zdev:early=1 > The device is activated during the initial RAM disc phase according to > the persistent configuration. > > zdev:early=0 > The device is activated as usual during the boot process. This is the > default. If auto-configuration data is present, the device is activated > during the initial RAM disc phase according to the auto-configuration. The documentation is incorrect for Ubuntu. Canonical specifically builds zdev in a way that every change to persistent device configuration causes an update to the initial RAM-disk. See also: https://bugzilla.linux.ibm.com/show_bug.cgi?id=187578#c35 https://github.com/ibm-s390-linux/s390-tools/commit/7dd03eaeecdd0e2674f145aca34be1275d291bd8 > I can't interprete a SCSI LUN as a device with auto configuration data. (At > least, if the zfcp device hasn't NPIV enabled) This is related to auto-configuration as implemented for DPM. == Comment: #6 - Thorsten Diehl - 2023-03-03 12:41:44 == So, IIUC, chzdev is built for Ubuntu with ZDEV_ALWAYS_UPDATE_INITRD=1, which make the parameter zdev:early=0 ineffective. Correct? If you confirm, you may also close this bug. Not nice - then we have to find an alternate solution. == Comment: #7 - Peter Oberparleiter - 2023-03-07 06:48:07 == (In reply to comment #6) > So, IIUC, chzdev is built for Ubuntu with ZDEV_ALWAYS_UPDATE_INITRD=1, which > make the parameter zdev:early=0 ineffective. Correct? > If you confirm, you may also close this bug. > > Not nice - then we have to find an alternate solution. chzdev -p on Ubuntu will by default rebuild the initrd. This is intended behavior by Canonical and controlled by the ZDEV_ALWAYS_UPDATE_INITRD build-time switch. You can suppress it by adding option --no-root-update to
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2043713] Re: TestApportValgrind.test_valgrind_min_installed fails on armhf: Invalid write of size 4
** Tags removed: rls-nn-incoming -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apport in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2043713 Title: TestApportValgrind.test_valgrind_min_installed fails on armhf: Invalid write of size 4 Status in apport package in Ubuntu: In Progress Bug description: autopkgtests are pretty reliably failing[1] on armhf due to the following (single) test failure: 517s === FAILURES === 517s TestApportValgrind.test_valgrind_min_installed 517s 517s self = 517s 517s def test_valgrind_min_installed(self): 517s """Valgrind is installed and recent enough.""" 517s cmd = ["valgrind", "-q", "--extra-debuginfo-path=./", "ls"] 517s (ret, out, err) = self._call(cmd) 517s > self.assertEqual(err, "") 517s E AssertionError: "==2567== Invalid write of size 4\n==2567[1064 chars]= \n" != '' 517s E - ==2567== Invalid write of size 4 517s E - ==2567== at 0x4843040: ??? (in /usr/lib/arm-linux-gnueabihf/libselinux.so.1) 517s E - ==2567== Address 0xfec9a7e4 is on thread 1's stack 517s E - ==2567== 64 bytes below stack pointer 517s E - ==2567== 517s E - ==2567== Invalid write of size 4 517s E - ==2567== at 0x4842F96: ??? (in /usr/lib/arm-linux-gnueabihf/libselinux.so.1) 517s E - ==2567== Address 0xfec9a758 is on thread 1's stack 517s E - ==2567== 160 bytes below stack pointer 517s E - ==2567== 517s E - ==2567== Invalid write of size 4 517s E - ==2567== at 0x484958C: selinuxfs_exists (in /usr/lib/arm-linux-gnueabihf/libselinux.so.1) 517s E - ==2567== Address 0xfec9a7bc is on thread 1's stack 517s E - ==2567== 48 bytes below stack pointer 517s E - ==2567== 517s E - ==2567== Invalid write of size 4 517s E - ==2567== at 0x4842F0E: ??? (in /usr/lib/arm-linux-gnueabihf/libselinux.so.1) 517s E - ==2567== Address 0xfec9a690 is on thread 1's stack 517s E - ==2567== 16 bytes below stack pointer 517s E - ==2567== 517s E - ==2567== Invalid write of size 4 517s E - ==2567== at 0x4842E62: ??? (in /usr/lib/arm-linux-gnueabihf/libselinux.so.1) 517s E - ==2567== Address 0xfec9a6a0 is on thread 1's stack 517s E - ==2567== 8 bytes below stack pointer 517s E - ==2567== 517s 517s tests/integration/test_apport_valgrind.py:45: AssertionError 517s === warnings summary === This is caused by -fstack-clash-protection. Bug-RedHat: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1522678 [1] https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/a/apport/noble/armhf To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apport/+bug/2043713/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 1831747] Re: fixrtc hook requires e2fsprogs package, but that is not a dependency
** Tags removed: rls-nn-incoming ** Tags added: foundations-todo ** Also affects: initramfs-tools (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: Low Status: Confirmed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to initramfs-tools in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1831747 Title: fixrtc hook requires e2fsprogs package, but that is not a dependency Status in initramfs-tools package in Ubuntu: Confirmed Status in initramfs-tools source package in Noble: Confirmed Bug description: Package "initramfs-tools-core" provides "/usr/share/initramfs- tools/hooks/fixrtc" which runs during the update or regeneration of the initramfs and requires the file "/sbin/dumpe2fs" (available from "e2fsprogs") to be present, otherwise it fails and aborts the whole process, leading e.g. to an inconsistent package system. The problem/cause seems to be that "initramfs-tools-core" package has no direct or indirect hard dependency on "e2fsprogs". I believe either the package dependency should be added, or the fixrtc hook script should be rewritten so that it just outputs a warning instead of aborting with a failure if missing "dumpe2fs" is not a critical problem. This issue seems to affect at least Ubuntu 16.04 and 18.04. It has been brought to my attention at https://askubuntu.com/q/1148791/367990 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/initramfs-tools/+bug/1831747/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2045899] Re: More amdgpu crashes: pagefaults, ring timeouts and parser bugs
Waiting for 6.5.13 to actually build but on 6.6.0-14 from proposed now
which is based on 6.6.3 which probably has all the fancy patches too
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to mesa in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2045899
Title:
More amdgpu crashes: pagefaults, ring timeouts and parser bugs
Status in linux package in Ubuntu:
Incomplete
Status in mesa package in Ubuntu:
New
Bug description:
I think running the Mattermost snap forced to Wayland rendering
*eventually* seems to crash amdgpu, it recovers at the kernel level
but the GUI doesn't actually recover and I also can switch tty with
the keyboard.
I have attached the two crashes from yesterday, they look slightly
different but may be the same cause:
LastDmesg.txt contains the journalctl -k -b of the last failed boot,
OlderDmesg.txt contains the same for the crash before that.
ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 24.04
Package: linux-image-6.5.0-14-generic 6.5.0-14.14
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 6.5.0-14.14-generic 6.5.3
Uname: Linux 6.5.0-14-generic x86_64
NonfreeKernelModules: zfs
ApportVersion: 2.27.0-0ubuntu6
Architecture: amd64
CasperMD5CheckResult: pass
CurrentDesktop: GNOME
Date: Thu Dec 7 13:09:42 2023
InstallationDate: Installed on 2022-11-26 (376 days ago)
InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 23.04 "Lunar Lobster" - Alpha amd64 (20221126)
MachineType: {report['dmi.sys.vendor']} {report['dmi.product.name']}
ProcFB: 0 amdgpudrmfb
ProcKernelCmdLine: BOOT_IMAGE=/vmlinuz-6.5.0-14-generic
root=/dev/mapper/ubuntu-root ro rootflags=subvol=@ quiet splash zswap.enabled=1
zswap.compressor=zstd zswap.max_pool_percent=20 zswap.zpool=zsmalloc
vt.handoff=7
PulseList: Error: command ['pacmd', 'list'] failed with exit code 1: No
PulseAudio daemon running, or not running as session daemon.
RelatedPackageVersions:
linux-restricted-modules-6.5.0-14-generic N/A
linux-backports-modules-6.5.0-14-generic N/A
linux-firmware20230919.git3672ccab-0ubuntu2.2
SourcePackage: linux
UpgradeStatus: No upgrade log present (probably fresh install)
dmi.bios.date: 09/14/2023
dmi.bios.release: 1.47
dmi.bios.vendor: LENOVO
dmi.bios.version: R23ET71W (1.47 )
dmi.board.asset.tag: Not Available
dmi.board.name: 21CF004PGE
dmi.board.vendor: LENOVO
dmi.board.version: SDK0T76538 WIN
dmi.chassis.asset.tag: No Asset Information
dmi.chassis.type: 10
dmi.chassis.vendor: LENOVO
dmi.chassis.version: None
dmi.ec.firmware.release: 1.28
dmi.modalias:
dmi:bvnLENOVO:bvrR23ET71W(1.47):bd09/14/2023:br1.47:efr1.28:svnLENOVO:pn21CF004PGE:pvrThinkPadT14Gen3:rvnLENOVO:rn21CF004PGE:rvrSDK0T76538WIN:cvnLENOVO:ct10:cvrNone:skuLENOVO_MT_21CF_BU_Think_FM_ThinkPadT14Gen3:
dmi.product.family: ThinkPad T14 Gen 3
dmi.product.name: 21CF004PGE
dmi.product.sku: LENOVO_MT_21CF_BU_Think_FM_ThinkPad T14 Gen 3
dmi.product.version: ThinkPad T14 Gen 3
dmi.sys.vendor: LENOVO
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/2045899/+subscriptions
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2045899] Re: More amdgpu crashes: pagefaults, ring timeouts and parser bugs
These ones I don't remember seeing before:
[drm:amdgpu_cs_ioctl [amdgpu]] *ERROR* Failed to initialize parser -125!
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to mesa in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2045899
Title:
More amdgpu crashes: pagefaults, ring timeouts and parser bugs
Status in linux package in Ubuntu:
Incomplete
Status in mesa package in Ubuntu:
New
Bug description:
I think running the Mattermost snap forced to Wayland rendering
*eventually* seems to crash amdgpu, it recovers at the kernel level
but the GUI doesn't actually recover and I also can switch tty with
the keyboard.
I have attached the two crashes from yesterday, they look slightly
different but may be the same cause:
LastDmesg.txt contains the journalctl -k -b of the last failed boot,
OlderDmesg.txt contains the same for the crash before that.
ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 24.04
Package: linux-image-6.5.0-14-generic 6.5.0-14.14
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 6.5.0-14.14-generic 6.5.3
Uname: Linux 6.5.0-14-generic x86_64
NonfreeKernelModules: zfs
ApportVersion: 2.27.0-0ubuntu6
Architecture: amd64
CasperMD5CheckResult: pass
CurrentDesktop: GNOME
Date: Thu Dec 7 13:09:42 2023
InstallationDate: Installed on 2022-11-26 (376 days ago)
InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 23.04 "Lunar Lobster" - Alpha amd64 (20221126)
MachineType: {report['dmi.sys.vendor']} {report['dmi.product.name']}
ProcFB: 0 amdgpudrmfb
ProcKernelCmdLine: BOOT_IMAGE=/vmlinuz-6.5.0-14-generic
root=/dev/mapper/ubuntu-root ro rootflags=subvol=@ quiet splash zswap.enabled=1
zswap.compressor=zstd zswap.max_pool_percent=20 zswap.zpool=zsmalloc
vt.handoff=7
PulseList: Error: command ['pacmd', 'list'] failed with exit code 1: No
PulseAudio daemon running, or not running as session daemon.
RelatedPackageVersions:
linux-restricted-modules-6.5.0-14-generic N/A
linux-backports-modules-6.5.0-14-generic N/A
linux-firmware20230919.git3672ccab-0ubuntu2.2
SourcePackage: linux
UpgradeStatus: No upgrade log present (probably fresh install)
dmi.bios.date: 09/14/2023
dmi.bios.release: 1.47
dmi.bios.vendor: LENOVO
dmi.bios.version: R23ET71W (1.47 )
dmi.board.asset.tag: Not Available
dmi.board.name: 21CF004PGE
dmi.board.vendor: LENOVO
dmi.board.version: SDK0T76538 WIN
dmi.chassis.asset.tag: No Asset Information
dmi.chassis.type: 10
dmi.chassis.vendor: LENOVO
dmi.chassis.version: None
dmi.ec.firmware.release: 1.28
dmi.modalias:
dmi:bvnLENOVO:bvrR23ET71W(1.47):bd09/14/2023:br1.47:efr1.28:svnLENOVO:pn21CF004PGE:pvrThinkPadT14Gen3:rvnLENOVO:rn21CF004PGE:rvrSDK0T76538WIN:cvnLENOVO:ct10:cvrNone:skuLENOVO_MT_21CF_BU_Think_FM_ThinkPadT14Gen3:
dmi.product.family: ThinkPad T14 Gen 3
dmi.product.name: 21CF004PGE
dmi.product.sku: LENOVO_MT_21CF_BU_Think_FM_ThinkPad T14 Gen 3
dmi.product.version: ThinkPad T14 Gen 3
dmi.sys.vendor: LENOVO
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/2045899/+subscriptions
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2045899] Re: More amdgpu crashes: pagefaults, ring timeouts and parser bugs
I saw similar messages in
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/2032386 but that
only caused hangs and not block the entire desktop (and Firefox is good
now so I don't know)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to mesa in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2045899
Title:
More amdgpu crashes: pagefaults, ring timeouts and parser bugs
Status in linux package in Ubuntu:
Incomplete
Status in mesa package in Ubuntu:
New
Bug description:
I think running the Mattermost snap forced to Wayland rendering
*eventually* seems to crash amdgpu, it recovers at the kernel level
but the GUI doesn't actually recover and I also can switch tty with
the keyboard.
I have attached the two crashes from yesterday, they look slightly
different but may be the same cause:
LastDmesg.txt contains the journalctl -k -b of the last failed boot,
OlderDmesg.txt contains the same for the crash before that.
ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 24.04
Package: linux-image-6.5.0-14-generic 6.5.0-14.14
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 6.5.0-14.14-generic 6.5.3
Uname: Linux 6.5.0-14-generic x86_64
NonfreeKernelModules: zfs
ApportVersion: 2.27.0-0ubuntu6
Architecture: amd64
CasperMD5CheckResult: pass
CurrentDesktop: GNOME
Date: Thu Dec 7 13:09:42 2023
InstallationDate: Installed on 2022-11-26 (376 days ago)
InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 23.04 "Lunar Lobster" - Alpha amd64 (20221126)
MachineType: {report['dmi.sys.vendor']} {report['dmi.product.name']}
ProcFB: 0 amdgpudrmfb
ProcKernelCmdLine: BOOT_IMAGE=/vmlinuz-6.5.0-14-generic
root=/dev/mapper/ubuntu-root ro rootflags=subvol=@ quiet splash zswap.enabled=1
zswap.compressor=zstd zswap.max_pool_percent=20 zswap.zpool=zsmalloc
vt.handoff=7
PulseList: Error: command ['pacmd', 'list'] failed with exit code 1: No
PulseAudio daemon running, or not running as session daemon.
RelatedPackageVersions:
linux-restricted-modules-6.5.0-14-generic N/A
linux-backports-modules-6.5.0-14-generic N/A
linux-firmware20230919.git3672ccab-0ubuntu2.2
SourcePackage: linux
UpgradeStatus: No upgrade log present (probably fresh install)
dmi.bios.date: 09/14/2023
dmi.bios.release: 1.47
dmi.bios.vendor: LENOVO
dmi.bios.version: R23ET71W (1.47 )
dmi.board.asset.tag: Not Available
dmi.board.name: 21CF004PGE
dmi.board.vendor: LENOVO
dmi.board.version: SDK0T76538 WIN
dmi.chassis.asset.tag: No Asset Information
dmi.chassis.type: 10
dmi.chassis.vendor: LENOVO
dmi.chassis.version: None
dmi.ec.firmware.release: 1.28
dmi.modalias:
dmi:bvnLENOVO:bvrR23ET71W(1.47):bd09/14/2023:br1.47:efr1.28:svnLENOVO:pn21CF004PGE:pvrThinkPadT14Gen3:rvnLENOVO:rn21CF004PGE:rvrSDK0T76538WIN:cvnLENOVO:ct10:cvrNone:skuLENOVO_MT_21CF_BU_Think_FM_ThinkPadT14Gen3:
dmi.product.family: ThinkPad T14 Gen 3
dmi.product.name: 21CF004PGE
dmi.product.sku: LENOVO_MT_21CF_BU_Think_FM_ThinkPad T14 Gen 3
dmi.product.version: ThinkPad T14 Gen 3
dmi.sys.vendor: LENOVO
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/2045899/+subscriptions
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Touch-packages] [Bug 2045899] Re: More amdgpu crashes: pagefaults, ring timeouts and parser bugs
** Attachment added: "OlderDmesg.txt"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/2045899/+attachment/5727266/+files/OlderDmesg.txt
** Also affects: mesa (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to mesa in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2045899
Title:
More amdgpu crashes: pagefaults, ring timeouts and parser bugs
Status in linux package in Ubuntu:
Incomplete
Status in mesa package in Ubuntu:
New
Bug description:
I think running the Mattermost snap forced to Wayland rendering
*eventually* seems to crash amdgpu, it recovers at the kernel level
but the GUI doesn't actually recover and I also can switch tty with
the keyboard.
I have attached the two crashes from yesterday, they look slightly
different but may be the same cause:
LastDmesg.txt contains the journalctl -k -b of the last failed boot,
OlderDmesg.txt contains the same for the crash before that.
ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 24.04
Package: linux-image-6.5.0-14-generic 6.5.0-14.14
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 6.5.0-14.14-generic 6.5.3
Uname: Linux 6.5.0-14-generic x86_64
NonfreeKernelModules: zfs
ApportVersion: 2.27.0-0ubuntu6
Architecture: amd64
CasperMD5CheckResult: pass
CurrentDesktop: GNOME
Date: Thu Dec 7 13:09:42 2023
InstallationDate: Installed on 2022-11-26 (376 days ago)
InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 23.04 "Lunar Lobster" - Alpha amd64 (20221126)
MachineType: {report['dmi.sys.vendor']} {report['dmi.product.name']}
ProcFB: 0 amdgpudrmfb
ProcKernelCmdLine: BOOT_IMAGE=/vmlinuz-6.5.0-14-generic
root=/dev/mapper/ubuntu-root ro rootflags=subvol=@ quiet splash zswap.enabled=1
zswap.compressor=zstd zswap.max_pool_percent=20 zswap.zpool=zsmalloc
vt.handoff=7
PulseList: Error: command ['pacmd', 'list'] failed with exit code 1: No
PulseAudio daemon running, or not running as session daemon.
RelatedPackageVersions:
linux-restricted-modules-6.5.0-14-generic N/A
linux-backports-modules-6.5.0-14-generic N/A
linux-firmware20230919.git3672ccab-0ubuntu2.2
SourcePackage: linux
UpgradeStatus: No upgrade log present (probably fresh install)
dmi.bios.date: 09/14/2023
dmi.bios.release: 1.47
dmi.bios.vendor: LENOVO
dmi.bios.version: R23ET71W (1.47 )
dmi.board.asset.tag: Not Available
dmi.board.name: 21CF004PGE
dmi.board.vendor: LENOVO
dmi.board.version: SDK0T76538 WIN
dmi.chassis.asset.tag: No Asset Information
dmi.chassis.type: 10
dmi.chassis.vendor: LENOVO
dmi.chassis.version: None
dmi.ec.firmware.release: 1.28
dmi.modalias:
dmi:bvnLENOVO:bvrR23ET71W(1.47):bd09/14/2023:br1.47:efr1.28:svnLENOVO:pn21CF004PGE:pvrThinkPadT14Gen3:rvnLENOVO:rn21CF004PGE:rvrSDK0T76538WIN:cvnLENOVO:ct10:cvrNone:skuLENOVO_MT_21CF_BU_Think_FM_ThinkPadT14Gen3:
dmi.product.family: ThinkPad T14 Gen 3
dmi.product.name: 21CF004PGE
dmi.product.sku: LENOVO_MT_21CF_BU_Think_FM_ThinkPad T14 Gen 3
dmi.product.version: ThinkPad T14 Gen 3
dmi.sys.vendor: LENOVO
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/2045899/+subscriptions
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
