[arch-general] postgres 12
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Friday, November 13, 2020 9:36 AM, ente wrote: > Hi, > > since the upgrade of postgress from 11.9 to 12.5 I am having issues > starting up using the systemd service file. > > When I do: > > > su postgres > > postgress -D data > > it works great. When I do > > > systemctl start postgresql > > I get: An old version of the database format was found. > > Checking the database version shows it is on 12. So obviously the > systemd unit file seems to point postgres to an unexpected location. > > My system file is pointing to a non-standard location according to the > arch wiki: > [Service] > Environment=PGROOT=/pathto/pgroot > PIDFile=/pathto/pgroot/data/postmaster.pid > > Anyone else facing the same issue? Any suggestions? Yes, there is a bug. It cost me my local database.
[arch-general] pacman has nothing to do last 5 days
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Sunday, December 8, 2019 12:06 AM, mick howe via arch-general wrote: > For the last five days or so it reports nothing to do:- > > [mick@cave ~]$ pacman -Syyuu > :: Synchronizing package databases... > core 135.1 KiB 938 KiB/s 00:00 [##] > 100% > extra 1647.8 KiB 2.68 MiB/s 00:01 [##] > 100% > community 4.7 MiB 2.66 MiB/s 00:02 [##] > 100% > multilib 164.2 KiB 2.97 MiB/s 00:00 [##] > 100% > :: Starting full system upgrade... > there is nothing to do > [mick@cave ~]$ > > This is the first time in around 10 years of running Arch this has > happened, has some thing changed in pacman that I missed? I have a similar issue, to be more preceise there are two issues here - "worldwide" servers are sometimes out of sync and pacman failure (seems so) to update when servers contain new packages. TL;dr the first issue is fixed by enabling alternative servers in mirrorlist, the second issue I could fixed by removing core/extra repository files in /var/lib/pacman/sync/. 1) After installing arch (some time ago) I enabled only "worldwide" servers. Approximately 1 year ago, there were cases when after 3-5 days pacman could not find any package updates (like the case above). After investigating this issue, it looks like "worldwide" servers were not synced: packages.archlinux.org returned, say firefox-67 while worldwide servers contained only firefox-66. This issue was fixed by enabling other repos in mirrorlist. As a consequence, pacman sometimes prints message like "error, could not download linux-5.4.1 from mirror " but downloads from another server and continues update. 2) The second issue is more strange. As in previous cases pacman prints "nothing to do", but this time servers (disclaimer: I checked only few of enabled) do contain new version of packages, so it looks like there is issue in pacman, not servers. In my case removing core.db and core.files at /var/lib/pacman/sync/ fixed the problem. This issue in my case was revealed as partial updates leading to loading lib errors. It occurs pretty rarely, probably 1-2 times in 3 months and easy to fix. I didn't bother to document and file a bug. P.S I checked that I have latest version of mirrorlist.
[arch-general] Package guidelines
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Monday, October 14, 2019 8:59 PM, Alberto Salvia Novella via arch-general wrote: > Video-reply https://youtu.be/a_CNx63kLxk Why so serious? Seriously, why is this thread not nuked?
[arch-general] AppArmor support
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Sunday, 9 September 2018 17:34, Gus wrote: > > You have been rejected by heftig and tpowa. It is unclear why and what > > > you are asking here. > > It was accepted first and then rejected by heftig. Really? Just rejected by heftig? The issue was rejected 4 times, first by heftig than 3 times by Scimmia: 2018-09-03 "A Project Manager has denied the request pending for the following task: FS#59733 - [linux] enable AppArmor & SELinux User who did this - Doug Newgard (Scimmia) Reason for denial: 2018-09-05 "FS#59733 - [linux] enable AppArmor & SELinux User who did this - Doug Newgard (Scimmia) Reason for denial: No new information" "FS#59733 - [linux] enable AppArmor & SELinux User who did this - Doug Newgard (Scimmia) Reason for denial: I'm not going to reopen a ticket for people to make the same argument over and over" "Reason for denial: Stop having a catfight with the bugwranglers because you think, somehow, that people will be less likely to open duplicate bugs just because we provide dialog. There are better mediums to have this discussion." So far, this issue was closed by heftig and then 3 times by bug wrangler. This fact was hidden in the first post to this thread.
[arch-general] AppArmor support
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Sunday, 9 September 2018 13:42, Gus wrote: > I know such request was rejected here > https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/59733 > recently, but still AppArmor doesn't need linking with libraries and > doesn't > require as much userland support as SELinux, so it will not hurt to have > one > option enabled in kernel, right? You have been rejected by heftig and tpowa. It is unclear why and what you are asking here. Suppose AppArmour does not require linking. So what? Btw, you hided the information - this issue was reopened and closed again, so it was reconsidered and was closed twice.
[arch-general] update today causes avantfax_hourly cron: Exec format error?
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On August 27, 2018 1:38 PM, Leonid Isaev via arch-general wrote: > On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 03:02:38PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > > Eli, wouldn't it be easier for you to ignore people who are not as wise > > and psychologically balanced as you are? I doubt that anybody of us is > > able to learn from your wise comments, more likely we laugh at you, > > because we are psychically disturbed and dumb, so we don't know better. > > Well, speak for yourself. And grow up and learn to avoid being disturbed by > (deserved) critisism. > > Besides, for anyone knowledgeable it would always be easier to ignore other > less knowledgeable people... But you see where this would end up. > > Cheers, > > > > Leonid Isaev -1. You speak about about learning to listen criticism, but some people have not learned to express their ideas polite and to not being disturbed by less knowledgeable people. This is technical list not intended to aggressive comments. Nowhere it is written that subscribers of this list must tolerate aggressive, non-technical comments. So, I also join to those thinking that some persons from community are overly aggressive in mailing list/bugzilla/forum (this can be easily proven by looking at user's contribution). Keep in mind, that subscribers are interest neither in dumb questions *nor* in aggressive comments boosting someone's ego. Maksim Fomin
Re: [arch-general] ClamAV Flagging systemd package
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On July 14, 2018 3:19 PM, LoneVVolf wrote:
>
>
> On 14-07-18 16:52, David Murray via arch-general wrote:
>
> > Greetings,
> >
> > My nightly full-system ClamAV scan kicked out this last night:
> >
> > /var/cache/pacman/pkg/systemd-238.133-4-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz:
> > Unix.Trojan.Vali-6606621-0 FOUND
> >
> > Is this something I should be concerned about?
> >
> > TIA,
> >
> > Dave
Is this some of sort of joke or desire to receive attention? There are lots of
false positives from antivirus software, especially in case of linux. Trojan in
signed systemd package (if true) would have already done (Clamav found virus in
238 version) enormous damage to arch installations.
> https://www.virustotal.com/#/file/1aef694958c06497a8c5e98b0e6914b2a9af48faff736fcb42e3855377ee8e19/detection
>
> That shows 2 engines that detect something, Baidu and ClamAV .
>
> https://pcfixguides.com/how-to-effectively-remove-unix-trojan-vali-6606621-0-from-your-computer/
>
> It appears to be able to infect windows and Mac systems, and does look
>
> threatening.
This page looks like a search fake site which generates page in accordance to
your request. Look at deliberate generalized (to fit random search) and
unprofessional language ("ought to rank top in the list of danger", "When it
goes into your PC, your security application will caution you that a few bugs
are distinguished on your system", "From that point on, blue screen of death
will regularly happen", "expects to break down the system security. To begin
with, it would release the insurance, and then open the accesses for virus,
adware, spyware, browser hijacker, etc." - wtf???, "is fit for controlling
documents on your PC. It could unreservedly eliminate them, transform them, and
in most of time, it will hijack them" ...)
