On Sun 22 Aug 2021, at 15:37, David Wright <deb...@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote: > On Sun 22 Aug 2021 at 13:18:38 (+0100), Gareth Evans wrote: > > On Sun 22 Aug 2021, at 05:36, David Wright <deb...@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote: > > > On Fri 20 Aug 2021 at 14:13:55 (+0100), Gareth Evans wrote: > > > > > There is also no explanation in term.log, syslog or dpkg.log for the > > > > second interruption: > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Processing triggers for libapache2-mod-php7.4 (7.4.21-1+deb11u1) ... > > > > [upgrade interrupted...] > > > > W: APT had planned for dpkg to do more than it reported back (5014 vs > > > > 5047). > > > > Affected packages: texlive-fonts-recommended:amd64 > > > > texlive-lang-greek:amd64 texlive-latex-base:amd64 > > > > texlive-latex-extra:amd64 texlive-latex-recommended:amd64 > > > > texlive-pictures:amd64 texlive-plain-generic:amd64 texlive-science:amd64 > > > > --- > > [ … ] > > > > I'm no help here, as I've never seen output like that, > > > neither the "[ … ]", nor the "W: APT had planned …". > > > Is that output, with [upgrade interrupted...], a verbatim > > > copy/paste? Did this message appear spontaneously, or > > > because you yourself interrupted the process? > > > > "[...]" was just my way of showing output until this point has not been > > included in the paste, or that the paste includes gaps in output. I use > > this by habit from academic writing but perhaps <snip> might be better for > > this purpose? > > > > The interrupt and following "W: APT had planned..." appeared spontaneously. > > The upgrade stops, and [...] here stands in for etckeeper output, which I > > removed as noisy. > > Both the < … > and [ … ] are fine; it's just that
> [...] "upgrade > interrupted", in a passive construction, avoids specifying the agent, > which is what we need to know: was it you or APT whodunit. It wasn't me, but an apparent breakage. > > [ … ] > > > I have just noticed that the logged action after which it trips up: > > > > Processing triggers for libapache2-mod-php7.4 (7.4.21-1+deb11u1) ... > > > > is related to what may be another problem of sorts. php7.3 packages are > > removed as part of the upgrade but the config (mods-[enabled]) isn't > > changed. Apache2 won't start after upgrading until I > > > > a2dismod *php*7.3* > > > > >From /var/log/syslog: > > Aug 22 00:29:58 qwerty systemd[1]: Starting The Apache HTTP Server... > > Aug 22 00:29:58 qwerty apachectl[59333]: apache2: Syntax error on line 146 > > of /etc/apache2/apache2.conf: Syntax error on line 3 of > > /etc/apache2/mods-enabled/php7.3.load: Cannot load > > /usr/lib/apache2/modules/libphp7.3.so into server: > > /usr/lib/apache2/modules/libphp7.3.so: cannot open shared object file: No > > such file or directory > > Aug 22 00:29:58 qwerty apachectl[59330]: Action 'start' failed. > > > > Is it normal to have to do this sort of thing after a major upgrade? If > > not, could a hiccup here be related to the upgrade breaking? > > Well, the apache version is upgraded from 2.4.38 to 2.4.46 during the > transition from buster to bullseye, and although APT will look after > upgrading its conffiles, "conffiles" are those configuring the apache > software, not the mods-available/enabled that configure the service. > > People who run apache servers may have their own opinions on the > correct procedure. My own would be that you should be sure a > configuration is correct before you run that service, and testing > it is not best done during a major upgrade, but when the dust has > settled. What do you mean by "when the dust has settled" in this context? Thanks, Gareth > > Cheers, > David. > >