Re: [arch-general] netcl leaves network down until reenable performed - do we need note?
On 8/21/20 12:25 AM, Eli Schwartz via arch-general wrote:
>> That might have been an interesting precautionary measure for netctl
>> 1.18, at least for printing a message advising people to reenable the
>> service.
> Oh, for the record -- it looks like netctl already did this:
>
> https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/tree/trunk/netctl.install?h=packages/netctl
>
> post_upgrade() {
> if [[ $(vercmp 1.18 "$2") -gt 0 ]]; then
> grep -ls '^.include ' /etc/systemd/system/netctl@*.service | \
> while read -r unit; do
> profile=$(systemd-escape --unescape "${unit:27:-8}")
> echo ":: The unit for profile '$profile' uses deprecated
> features."
> echo " Consider running: netctl reenable $(printf '%q'
> "$profile")"
> done
> fi
> }
The fallibility of human infallibility...
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make 'em drink :)
Thank you Eli, at least we know now the distribution was 1-step ahead.
--
David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [arch-general] netcl leaves network down until reenable performed - do we need note?
On 8/17/20 5:56 PM, Eli Schwartz wrote:
>> Couldn't there also be a post install that does a reenable for each netctl
>> profile found in /etc/systemd/system as another option to avoid this SNAFU?
>
> That might have been an interesting precautionary measure for netctl
> 1.18, at least for printing a message advising people to reenable the
> service.
Oh, for the record -- it looks like netctl already did this:
https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/tree/trunk/netctl.install?h=packages/netctl
post_upgrade() {
if [[ $(vercmp 1.18 "$2") -gt 0 ]]; then
grep -ls '^.include ' /etc/systemd/system/netctl@*.service | \
while read -r unit; do
profile=$(systemd-escape --unescape "${unit:27:-8}")
echo ":: The unit for profile '$profile' uses deprecated
features."
echo " Consider running: netctl reenable $(printf '%q'
"$profile")"
done
fi
}
--
Eli Schwartz
Bug Wrangler and Trusted User
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [arch-general] No login after update
On 8/20/20 3:52 PM, Damjan Georgievski via arch-general wrote: > Now I don't understand all the defensiveness - let's all work together > to improve things. This is not a non-issue. That's the Arch I fondly remember. You are on this list either because (1) you want to help, or (2) you need help. Both are best accomplished with courtesy and civility and nothing more. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
Re: [arch-general] Gaetan Bisson Resignation
On 8/20/20 4:24 AM, Amin Vakil via arch-general wrote: > Hello, > > I'm not an Arch Linux Developer myself, so I'm not allowed to reply to > this email on arch-dev-public. > Gaetan began at a time when things were different at Arch, there was just arch-dev, and it was open to community posts under Allan's stewardship. That transparency and community involvement served Arch well and served as a moderating influence on the direction of Arch. He will be missed and we wish him well in his future endeavors. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [arch-general] No login after update
> I don't see what all the fuss is about > > If you're using Arch, then you should: > > 1. Check Arch news before running update > 2. Update regularly > 3. Watch output from pacman for warnings/advice > 4. Run pacdiff after update and before reboot > > After step 4 there are no longer any pacnew files That would have shown that the new file doesn't have pam_tally2, it wont say you wouldn't be able to login after reboot. actually, even assuming you would know to fix the issue, but you didn't fix the problem immediately and you went to make a coffee - your screen saver was activated, you are locked out. Now I don't understand all the defensiveness - let's all work together to improve things. This is not a non-issue. -- damjan
Re: [arch-general] Does PAM 1.4.0 require rebuilding all application / modules using libpam?
On 8/20/20 12:27 PM, Amish via arch-general wrote: Hello, Hi I have few packages (eg. pam_geoip, pam_abl) in custom repo which use libpam. Can someone clarify if PAM upgrade to 1.4.0 would require those packages to be rebuilt? I don't think so. I have eleven packages that require Pam. Pam upgraded normally to 1.4.x, it didn't created any trouble in my system I have few systems using those PAM modules and if those modules break after updating and rebooting then I will lose access to the system. And I do not want to end up in that situation. Since I haven't seen mass-rebuilt of other modules (like pam-krb5, pam_mount etc.), I think rebuild is not required. But would still like if some developer can confirm before I upgrade. Thank you, Amish. -- Maderios
Re: [arch-general] HP Laserjet plus 1020 Problem
Em agosto 20, 2020 2:28 das escreveu: On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 9:25 PM Giancarlo Razzolini wrote: I believe your printer works without hplip and using the driverless option. That's something you can also try. I tried it your way too. I removed hplip. It seemed plausible too. When the printer was not working in Arch Linux I booted into Debian and without installing hplip I tried printing. And it worked. But removing hplip did not help either. I didn't tell you to remove hplip. Driverless and driver can co-exist just fine. I have on my machine right now, both a driverless printer registered to my cups and a version of the same printer using hplip. I've searched yesterday your printer and it seems it does supports driverless. Also, some HP printers, if you want to use them on cable, you have to change an option on EWS, otherwise it won't work. Regards, Giancarlo Razzolini pgp5NjcY7lwXd.pgp Description: PGP signature
[arch-general] Does PAM 1.4.0 require rebuilding all application / modules using libpam?
Hello, I have few packages (eg. pam_geoip, pam_abl) in custom repo which use libpam. Can someone clarify if PAM upgrade to 1.4.0 would require those packages to be rebuilt? I have few systems using those PAM modules and if those modules break after updating and rebooting then I will lose access to the system. And I do not want to end up in that situation. Since I haven't seen mass-rebuilt of other modules (like pam-krb5, pam_mount etc.), I think rebuild is not required. But would still like if some developer can confirm before I upgrade. Thank you, Amish.
[arch-general] Gaetan Bisson Resignation
Hello, I'm not an Arch Linux Developer myself, so I'm not allowed to reply to this email on arch-dev-public. But just out of curiosity and to learn something, would you care to share with us what majority's views is in conflict with your views? Best Regards, Amin Vakil On 8/20/20 3:13 AM, Gaetan Bisson via arch-dev-public wrote: > Dear all, > > I've joined the Arch team in 2010 and spent a decade as a developer; > it's been a great privilege to be a part of such an awesome community > and also a lot of fun. However I felt the ten-year mark was a good > opportunity for me to move on since I recognize the majority's views on > the future of the distro have of late steadily been diverging from mine. > > And thus I hereby resign my position of Arch Linux Developer. > > All the best in your future endeavors! > signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [arch-general] No login after update
On Thu, 20 Aug 2020 at 07:10, Kusoneko wrote: > > I think he's trying to imply that pacman stores a copy of the archive > containing the previous version somewhere and that pacman should extract > the config files from both and see if something changed before providing a > .pacnew. Only thing is, that would cost much more storage space than if one > lazily ignored and let the pacnew files be wherever they're placed. In > other words, not really a good idea unless you have tons of storage space. > I guess you could theoretically patch pacman to do so for yourself if you > really wanted to, but for most people it wouldn't be worth it. I don't see what all the fuss is about If you're using Arch, then you should: 1. Check Arch news before running update 2. Update regularly 3. Watch output from pacman for warnings/advice 4. Run pacdiff after update and before reboot After step 4 there are no longer any pacnew files
Re: [arch-general] No login after update
On 8/19/20 15:02, Manuel Reimer wrote: > Hello, > > I know that Arch is not for the "average user" and some background > knowledge is expected, but this was the first time I needed a boot stick > since I think at least one year. > > Some minutes ago I did a regular system update and after that decided to > reboot. After reboot I was unable to log into my system. After fiddling > a bit I rebooted to an Arch boot stick to find the following message in > pacman.log: > > [2020-08-19T20:42:55+0200] [ALPM] warning: /etc/pam.d/system-login > installed as > /etc/pam.d/system-login.pacnew > > As this seemed to be a candidate that may cause login problems, I > deleted "system-login" and moved the ".pacnew" into place. > > After reboot I'm now able to log in again... > > IMHO something like this should not happen... > > Maybe it's worth a note on the Arch homepage that it is important to > move this pacnew into place before reboot? > > Manuel I'm just going to reiterate some things, and offer a solution that would have saved you this headache, and then I'm ignoring this thread as it's tiresome. 1.) .pacnew files shouldn't be ignored. They are only created if *you* (or a mispackaged software) have modified files provided by a package from their default state. 2.) True of anything, really, but don't modify PAM files unless you have a significant understanding to a complete grok of what you're doing. 3.) This isn't a news item, as it's isolated to your particular install and customizations. As for the solution, https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/etc-update/ Ta-da. There are other packages that do similar things. You could even have it run automatically after certain packages update with a hook[0]. By running that after your -Sy and before the reboot, you'd see that the line present in your configuration is not part of the default managed by pacman/the package, with the option to: - remove it (effectively reverting to the default file as provided by the package) - merge it with the new one - interactively edit etc. It even cleans up .pacnew files for you after you've made your decisions. You now have no excuse to have .pacnew files all over nor to have changes that are incompatible with new software (provided you read the software's release notes to see if the deprecated, renamed, etc. a configuration in the new version). [0] https://jlk.fjfi.cvut.cz/arch/manpages/man/alpm-hooks.5 -- brent saner https://square-r00t.net/ GPG info: https://square-r00t.net/gpg-info signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
