10.04 has the same problem, and should be Won't Fix.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/771372
Title:
procps runs too early in the boot process
To manage notifications about this bug go
maverick has seen the end of its life and is no longer receiving any
updates. Marking the maverick task for this ticket as Won't Fix.
** Changed in: procps (Ubuntu Maverick)
Status: Fix Committed = Won't Fix
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs,
natty has seen the end of its life and is no longer receiving any
updates. Marking the natty task for this ticket as Won't Fix.
** Changed in: procps (Ubuntu Natty)
Status: Fix Committed = Won't Fix
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
oneiric has seen the end of its life and is no longer receiving any
updates. Marking the oneiric task for this ticket as Won't Fix.
** Changed in: procps (Ubuntu Oneiric)
Status: Fix Committed = Won't Fix
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs,
This bug seems to be back in Trusty Tahr, i ran into the exact issue
described here just now, not more then an hour after updating the
system.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/771372
** Tags added: bot-stop-nagging
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/771372
Title:
procps runs too early in the boot process
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
Hi, we're exactly hit by the problem Vincent described in #40,
This is happened to us on 12.04 and only appeared after an upgrade on
24.9.2012.
Please see
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/2012-September/264199.html
for some more details.
The problem does not appear on 12.10
The proposed fix is quite disruptive. For example, if a sysctl is set in
/etc/network/interfaces (because it is network related), it will be
erased when procps will be updated. For example:
iface dmz.902 inet static
[...]
up sysctl -w net.ipv4.conf.all.rp_filter=0
up
** Tags removed: verification-done verification-done-lucid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/771372
Title:
procps runs too early in the boot process
To manage notifications about this
Andreas, its likely that the update just fixed it for some use cases.
However, I would have expected it to fix your particular use case,
because your VLAN trunks should be up as soon as 'stopped networking' is
emitted, since that is emitted as soon as 'ifup -a' exits.
The error you see is likely
Is this now really fixed in Lucid? As I have mentioned in comment #29 we
had applied this update from lucid-proposed and and continue to see this
error in /var/log/boot.log:
init: procps (virtual-filesystems) main process (670) terminated with
status 255
The initial problem remains the same, the
Peter, thanks for the bump. This just needed the verification-done flag
for our process to catch it. I'll take a look at doing the sru-release
tomorrow morning.
** Tags added: verification-done
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to
Clint, isn't this tag sufficient to get out the fix for Lucid:
verification-done-lucid
?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/771372
Title:
procps runs too early in the boot process
To
Excerpts from Peter Matulis's message of Fri Mar 09 12:50:44 UTC 2012:
Clint, isn't this tag sufficient to get out the fix for Lucid:
verification-done-lucid
No, that tag is used for informational purposes only.
In the pending-sru report here:
For instance, in this case, I think its ok to release to lucid-updates
in spite of the fact that maverick has not been verified, because
precise is scheduled to be released soon, and maverick EOL'd. So in this
case, there's little danger that a user will upgrade and then find that
things have
Thank you for that nice explanation.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/771372
Title:
procps runs too early in the boot process
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
This bug was fixed in the package procps - 1:3.2.8-1ubuntu4.2
---
procps (1:3.2.8-1ubuntu4.2) lucid-proposed; urgency=low
* Make procps job run twice: as early as possible (for kernel
parameters such as kernel.printk) and then after all network
interfaces are up (to account
When will the fix for Lucid be released? The LTS fix should get out
there in my opinion.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/771372
Title:
procps runs too early in the boot process
To
With the fix for bug #602896 included in a subsequent maverick SRU, this
should no longer cause problems at install time. Resetting the
verification status for maverick (this is no longer failed). Is
someone willing/able to test this fix on maverick?
** Tags removed:
We applied the proposed fix to procps on a test machine but upon
rebooting the problem remained, with the following message appearing in
/var/log/boot.log:
init: procps (virtual-filesystems) main process (670) terminated with
status 255
We use /etc/sysctl.conf to disable frame filtering for
Hello Mark, or anyone else affected,
Accepted procps into maverick-proposed, the package will build now and
be available in a few hours. Please test and give feedback here. See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation how to
enable and use -proposed. Thank you in advance!
Hello Mark, or anyone else affected,
Accepted procps into natty-proposed, the package will build now and be
available in a few hours. Please test and give feedback here. See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation how to
enable and use -proposed. Thank you in advance!
**
Hello Mark, or anyone else affected,
Accepted procps into lucid-proposed, the package will build now and be
available in a few hours. Please test and give feedback here. See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation how to
enable and use -proposed. Thank you in advance!
**
The fix in lucid-proposed fixed my issue, many thanks.
** Tags added: verification-done-lucid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/771372
Title:
procps runs too early in the boot process
@James, the following upstart job that you suggested fixes the issue on
Lucid. Would that be possible to have it include in the next update ?
Thanks.
# procps - set sysctls from /etc/sysctl.conf
#
# This task sets kernel sysctl variables from /etc/sysctl.conf and
# /etc/sysctl.d
description
** Branch linked: lp:~jamesodhunt/ubuntu/lucid/procps/fix-for-bug-771372
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/771372
Title:
procps runs too early in the boot process
To manage
@Simon (and others running Lucid): Please could you try modifying your
/etc/init/procps.conf so it contains the following and let us know if
this fixes the issue on Lucid?:
instance $UPSTART_EVENTS
start on virtual-filesystems or stopped networking
--
You received this bug notification
@James, you suggestion worked. Note that I dropped the env
UPSTART_EVENTS=. Here is the job definition I used.
# grep -v # /etc/init/procps.conf
description set sysctls from /etc/sysctl.conf
instance $UPSTART_EVENTS
start on virtual-filesystems or stopped networking
task
script
cat
James, I added back the env UPSTART_EVENTS= as manually starting the
job complained about this variable to be unknown. With and without the
sysctl keys are updated so that looks good on that side.
One thing that I noted in those 2 reboot tests is that my ntpd is
exiting after successfully binding
I found traces of the ntpd issue dating from November 10th so that's
unrelated, sorry for the noise.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/771372
Title:
procps runs too early in the boot
The package currently in maverick-proposed fails to install when doing a
netinstall with d-i apt-setup/proposed boolean true in the preseed. I
would assume this will fail once the package hits maverick-updates.
I have tested this on AMD64 and armel images. Here is the relevent log
data:
Dec 5
Full syslog of the failing install on amd64.
** Attachment added: maverick-amd64.syslog
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/procps/+bug/771372/+attachment/2621063/+files/maverick-amd64.syslog
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
I think the problem is that the procps postinst in maverick uses 'start
procps' rather than 'invoke-rc.d procps start || exit $?' as is used in
precise. See bug 602896 for the fix.
This is a pre-existing bug in maverick, but it was dormant because the
installer didn't need to upgrade procps in
** Changed in: procps (Ubuntu Maverick)
Status: Fix Committed = In Progress
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/771372
Title:
procps runs too early in the boot process
To manage
Simon,
This does not work on my Lucid. The sysctl settings related to
the bridge modules are not set to the values defined under
/etc/sysctl.d/60-bridge-firewalling.conf.
Oh. Well, that's actually perfectly understandable, because the static-
network-up event was only introduced in oneiric!
This does not work on my Lucid. The sysctl settings related to the
bridge modules are not set to the values defined under /etc/sysctl.d/60
-bridge-firewalling.conf.
** Tags added: verification-failed-lucid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
Hello Mark, or anyone else affected,
Accepted procps into oneiric-proposed, the package will build now and be
available in a few hours. Please test and give feedback here. See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation how to
enable and use -proposed. Thank you in advance!
** Branch linked: lp:ubuntu/maverick-proposed/procps
** Branch linked: lp:ubuntu/oneiric-proposed/procps
** Branch linked: lp:ubuntu/lucid-proposed/procps
** Branch linked: lp:ubuntu/natty-proposed/procps
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
(Re-)fixed in 1:3.2.8-11ubuntu4, but I forgot to add the bug number,
sorry. Changelog entry:
procps (1:3.2.8-11ubuntu4) precise; urgency=low
.
* Reintroduce the patch from -11ubuntu2 to run sysctl twice, this time
with an upgrade-proof upstart job.
** Changed in: procps (Ubuntu
** Changed in: procps (Ubuntu Lucid)
Status: Triaged = In Progress
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/771372
Title:
procps runs too early in the boot process
To manage
** Changed in: procps (Ubuntu Maverick)
Status: Triaged = In Progress
** Changed in: procps (Ubuntu Natty)
Status: Triaged = In Progress
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
This bug was fixed in the package procps - 1:3.2.8-11ubuntu2
---
procps (1:3.2.8-11ubuntu2) precise; urgency=low
* Make procps job run twice: as early as possible (for kernel
parameters such as kernel.printk) and then after all network
interfaces are up (to account for any
** Branch linked: lp:ubuntu/procps
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/771372
Title:
procps runs too early in the boot process
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
Setting up procps (1:3.2.8-11ubuntu2) ...
Installing new version of config file /etc/init/procps.conf ...
start: Unknown parameter: UPSTART_EVENTS
invoke-rc.d: initscript procps, action start failed.
dpkg: error processing procps (--configure):
subprocess installed post-installation script
Same error here.
It happens on both 32-bit and 64-bit setups.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/771372
Title:
procps runs too early in the boot process
To manage notifications about
Upgrade error was reported as bug 891369. I'll revert that upload for
now to not break upgrades for too long.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/771372
Title:
procps runs too early in
Under the new precise egide of reverting broken uploads if they don't
make the situation worse, I did that now.
procps (1:3.2.8-11ubuntu3) precise; urgency=low
* debian/upstart: Revert previous upload, breaks upgrades. (LP:
#891369)
-- Martin Pitt martin.p...@ubuntu.com Thu, 17 Nov 2011
** Changed in: procps (Ubuntu Precise)
Assignee: (unassigned) = James Hunt (jamesodhunt)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/771372
Title:
procps runs too early in the boot process
= Short Answer =
The immediate fix (for the majority of cases) is to modify
/etc/init/procps.conf so that it's start on condition becomes:
start on virtual-filesystems or started networking
= Long Answer (brace yourselves! :-) =
This is an interesting issue. The ideal is a generic solution
** Branch linked: lp:~jamesodhunt/ubuntu/precise/procps/fix-for-
bug-771372
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/771372
Title:
procps runs too early in the boot process
To manage
** Also affects: procps (Ubuntu Lucid)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Also affects: procps (Ubuntu Maverick)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Also affects: procps (Ubuntu Natty)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Also affects: procps (Ubuntu Oneiric)
In another customer case, I noticed this too which is the same as #690433:
net.bridge.bridge-nf-call-ip6tables = 0
net.bridge.bridge-nf-call-iptables = 0
net.bridge.bridge-nf-call-arptables = 0
net.bridge.bridge-nf-filter-vlan-tagged = 0
These depend on the bridge module being loaded and due
This is an issue with the procps package, not Upstart.
** Package changed: upstart (Ubuntu) = procps (Ubuntu)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/771372
Title:
procps runs too early in
In one customer's case, they changed their procps.conf start on criteria to:
start on (virtual-filesystems or started portmap)
This allowed these settings to be applied properly:
sunrpc.udp_slot_table_entries = 128
sunrpc.tcp_slot_table_entries = 128
But all that does is workaround the issue.
54 matches
Mail list logo
