Re: Need help -- Virtual Machine Manager

[Fabien Roucaute]

Le 05/09/2020 à 01:57, Dennis Wicks a écrit :
> I'm running Win10 with Virtual Machine Manager on Deb 10.4. How to I
> attach my CD drive to Win10 so I can install some software?
> 
> Many TIA!
> Dennis
> 

Either the ISO or the CD-ROM need to be on the host. If KVM/libvirt
doesn't run on the machine running Virtual Machine Manager, you need to
create a pool for the ISO and upload the ISO there or to insert cd-rom
in the host CD drive.

Need help -- Virtual Machine Manager

[Dennis Wicks]

I'm running Win10 with Virtual Machine Manager on Deb 10.4. 
How to I attach my CD drive to Win10 so I can install some 
software?


Many TIA!
Dennis

Trackpoint not work properly on Thinkpad T470

[Aaron Elmquist]

Hi,

I'm on debian buster using KDE as my GUI. My trackpoint was working quite
well until a month or two ago (maybe more).  Now it has some odd behavior
where it will snap to the bottom of the screen every so often when I'm
using it.

Seems like the input is very sensitive to the bottom direction.  No
snapping to any other location  Really seems like the input in the down
direction became overly sensitive.  I can't really control the rate of a
downward cursor movement consistently.   It's just to fast from time to
time.

Any help would be appreciated.  I would provide more details, configs,
etc., but I'm not really sure what's relevant.

Thanks,
Aaron

Re: Having filesystems mounted with the user option be owned by the user that mounts them?

[Keith Bainbridge]

On 5/9/20 3:56 am, Reco wrote:

or do the backups as root,

Nothing wrong with this approach, see below.




Preferable to have only root have the ability to change the backup.
Perhaps have some trusted users in a group that can read them, for
retrieval purposes.

If an user needs to be able to roll back a file s/he should be keeping
their own progress copies.

So users should not need access to backup more than once or twice a
year. - then why do more than a couple of leaders need access?  Or am I
getting paranoid.


Thankfully, I have not been responsible for any data other than my own
and better half.

--
Keith Bainbridge

ke1thozgro...@gmx.com
location: -38,144

Re: Journal

[l0f4r0]

Hi,

3 sept. 2020 à 14:29 de humberto.freitas...@gmail.com:

> Just take a look at > Emacs > . It can 
> take care of everything you need. No kidding, everything or most of the 
> things lol ;).
>
Vim does the job as well. Just install VimWiki plugin [1].
You can choose a syntax among 3: VimWiki (default), Markdown and MediaWiki.
You can export your wiki/diary to html easily with a single shortcut if you 
stick to the defaults.

Of course, if you are not very keen on full text interfaces and especially vim, 
then I don't really recommend.
But if you are already familiar with vi(m), then it's a way to stay 
simple/light/straight to the point.

[1] More details on 
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/vimwiki/vimwiki/master/doc/vimwiki.txt

Best regards,
l0f4r0

Re: Journal

[Joe]

On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 09:40:07 +0100
Joe  wrote:

> On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 14:44:31 -0700
> David Christensen  wrote:
> 
> > On 2020-09-03 03:50, Joe wrote:  
> > > I've finally decided I have to keep a diary.
> > > 
> > > In Debian are RoboJournal and Lifeograph.
> > > 
> > > Neither of them actually function, at least in sid. Does anyone
> > > have any other ideas, apart from phpMyAdmin or Mysql Workbench?
> > >  
> > 
> > Understand that, depending upon jurisdiction, you can be required
> > to disclose diaries, journals, calendars, etc., if you are ever
> > involved in litigation.
> >   
> 
> I don't record things I don't want lawyers to see at all...
> 
> I keep all my email, I take screenshots of completed online
> transactions and record significant old-style purchases in a receipts
> database. I have directories for clients and all the government
> rubbish. That takes care of almost all my record-keeping needs. But
> occasionally something happens which isn't any of these things. I can
> indeed just keep a text file and add to it, but why do that when I
> have an SQL database manager online at all times?
> 
> I didn't mention it, but I'd like these records to be available
> remotely over ssh, which basically means TCP and no routing, which
> fits nicely with MySQL/MariaDB. If I use a simple file, or something
> web-based, I need OpenVPN for access, which like many Linux
> applications, works perfectly some of the time.
> 

OK, it's the web, for the moment at least. I made entry and tag editors
this afternoon with phpMyEdit, suitably modified for PHP7 (the latest
pME is fourteen years old). It's a bit clunky, but it will do for now.

-- 
Joe

Re: Having filesystems mounted with the user option be owned by the user that mounts them?

[David Christensen]

On 2020-09-04 10:37, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:

I'm still working on my backup system, and setting up mount points.


You might want to consider ZFS and zfs-auto-snapshot -- backups are 
automatic and immutable, and restores are self-serve.



David

Re: Can't log in after Stretch to Buster upgrade

[cgibbs]

On Fri Sep  4 12:07:23 2020 Greg Wooledge  wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 04, 2020 at 11:09:45AM -0700, cgi...@surfnaked.ca 
wrote:

>
>>  OpenSSL version mismatch. Built against 1010104f, you have 
1010006f

>
>> # find . -print | grep -i ssh   [output abridged]
>> /etc/X11/Xsession.d/90x11-comon_ssh-agent
>> /etc/xdg/autostart/gnome-keyring-ssh.desktop
>> /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libssh-gcrypt.so.4
>> /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libssh2.so.1.0.1
>> /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libssh-gcrypt.so.4.7.4
>> /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libssh2.so.1
>> 
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/gnome-keyring/devel/gkm-ssh-store-standalone.so

>> /usr/local/lib/pkgconfig/libssh2.pc
>> /usr/local/lib/libssh2.so
>> /usr/local/lib/libssh2.so.1.0.1
>> /usr/local/lib/libssh2.so.1
>> /usr/local/lib/libssh2.a
>> /usr/local/lib/libssh2.la
>> /var/cache/apt/archives/openssh*
>> /var/lib/dpkg/info/libssh*
>
> Shared libs in /usr/local/ are probably causing the issue.

I suspected as much.

> But it would be ssl libs, not ssh libs.  Look for libssl* and get 
rid of them,

> and then run ldconfig (as root).

Damn.  So close.  But unfortunately too late.  I've already done a 
fresh
install, and who knows what other inconsistencies have been cleaned 
up.
I've re-installed Seamonkey and VirtualBox (bringing them up to the 
latest

versions), and am about to make the move from Icedove to Thunderbird.
Once that's done, I'm close enough to fully operational for the time 
being.


Thanks again, everyone.

--
cgi...@surfnaked.ca (Charlie Gibbs)
I tried to join Paranoids Anonymous, but they won't tell me
where they hold their meetings.

Re: Can't log in after Stretch to Buster upgrade

[Greg Wooledge]

On Fri, Sep 04, 2020 at 11:09:45AM -0700, cgi...@surfnaked.ca wrote:
> OpenSSL version mismatch. Built against 1010104f, you have 1010006f

> # find . -print | grep -i ssh   [output abridged]
> /etc/X11/Xsession.d/90x11-comon_ssh-agent
> /etc/xdg/autostart/gnome-keyring-ssh.desktop
> /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libssh-gcrypt.so.4
> /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libssh2.so.1.0.1
> /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libssh-gcrypt.so.4.7.4
> /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libssh2.so.1
> /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/gnome-keyring/devel/gkm-ssh-store-standalone.so
> /usr/local/lib/pkgconfig/libssh2.pc
> /usr/local/lib/libssh2.so
> /usr/local/lib/libssh2.so.1.0.1
> /usr/local/lib/libssh2.so.1
> /usr/local/lib/libssh2.a
> /usr/local/lib/libssh2.la
> /var/cache/apt/archives/openssh*
> /var/lib/dpkg/info/libssh*

Shared libs in /usr/local/ are probably causing the issue.  But it would
be ssl libs, not ssh libs.  Look for libssl* and get rid of them,
and then run ldconfig (as root).

Re: Can't log in after Stretch to Buster upgrade

[cgibbs]

On Fri Sep  4 08:56:44 2020 Mike Kupfer  
wrote:


> cgi...@surfnaked.ca wrote:
>
>> I'll continue puttering for a few more days - maybe others will 
have

>> some ideas.
>
> So were there any errors or warnings in /var/log/Xorg.0.log?

Nothing there.

> I'd also check for error messages in $HOME/.xsession-errors.

Bingo.  The last line was:

OpenSSL version mismatch. Built against 1010104f, you have 1010006f

I had been seeing errors regarding openssh-server, but I saw them as
a separate problem I'd get to later.  It seems, though, to be 
preventing

logins as well.  I figured that removing and re-installing anything
to do with SSH or SSL might kill two birds with one stone.  I tried
various combinations, culminating with

# apt purge openssh-server openssh-client openssh-sftp-server openssl
# apt install openssh-server openssh-client openssh-sftp-server 
openssl


The install attempts invariably returned the same error message as
was appearing in ~/.xsession-errors.  It's as if there were old 
versions

lying around that were interfering with the upgrade.

# find . -print | grep -i ssh   [output abridged]
/etc/X11/Xsession.d/90x11-comon_ssh-agent
/etc/xdg/autostart/gnome-keyring-ssh.desktop
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libssh-gcrypt.so.4
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libssh2.so.1.0.1
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libssh-gcrypt.so.4.7.4
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libssh2.so.1
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/gnome-keyring/devel/gkm-ssh-store-standalone.so
/usr/local/lib/pkgconfig/libssh2.pc
/usr/local/lib/libssh2.so
/usr/local/lib/libssh2.so.1.0.1
/usr/local/lib/libssh2.so.1
/usr/local/lib/libssh2.a
/usr/local/lib/libssh2.la
/var/cache/apt/archives/openssh*
/var/lib/dpkg/info/libssh*

I tried moving various combinations of these modules off to a
quarantine directory, but still no joy.

I appreciate everyone's help, but my machine has been down for nearly
a week, and I have work to do.  I have wiped the root partition and
installed Buster from scratch; I can log in again and /home is intact.
(Having /home in its own partition is a life-saver.)  The time I spend
re-installing packages and re-building my setup will surely be less
than what I've lost so far.

Once I get my system re-built, I'm going to back up my root partition:

# dd if=/dev/sda1 | gzip >/mnt/backup/sda1.img.gz

Then, if an attempted upgrade fails, I'll just restore the entire root
partition, and live to fight another day.

--
cgi...@surfnaked.ca (Charlie Gibbs)
I used to be indecisive, but now I'm not so sure.

Re: Having filesystems mounted with the user option be owned by the user that mounts them?

[Charles Curley]

On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 13:37:07 -0400
rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:

> Is there a simple way to have the mounted filesystem be owned by the
> user that mounts it?

Have the user execute an appropriate script, and get the uid and gid
from the environment:

uid=$(grep ${USER} /etc/passwd | cut -d: -f 3)
gid=$(grep ${USER} /etc/passwd | cut -d: -f 4)

mount -o uid=${uid},gid=${gid} 


> 
> (I know something about the -o uid and -o gid options, but (1) that
> would only work for one specific uid,

Right. So determine them as the user mounts it.

Alternatively, do all backups as root, and mount the file system as
root. Root is for system stuff, such as backups.


-- 
Does anybody read signatures any more?

https://charlescurley.com
https://charlescurley.com/blog/

Re: Having filesystems mounted with the user option be owned by the user that mounts them?

[Reco]

Hi.

On Fri, Sep 04, 2020 at 01:37:07PM -0400, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> I'm still working on my backup system, and setting up mount points.
> 
> I was hoping that if I used "user" (or "users") in the mount command (or in 
> /etc/fstab) that the mounted filesystem would be owned by the user that 
> mounted 
> it.  That doesn't (seem to) work.

Because it should not work the way you seem to expect it to. Both "user"
and "users" mount options have completely different semantics. Quoting
mount(8):

user   Allow an ordinary user to mount the filesystem.
users  Allow any user to mount and to unmount the filesystem, even when
some other ordinary user mounted it.


> I could do things like give write permission to everyone,

So that one user could overwrite a backup of another user.

> or set up a group with the users that I might want to be able to write to the 
> backup,

See above.

> or set up a user for the specific purpose of doing backups,

grep x:34 /etc/passwd
It's there already.

> or do the backups as root,

Nothing wrong with this approach, see below.


> but none of those seem to be appropriate in one way or another.  

See below.


> Is there a simple way to have the mounted filesystem be owned by the user 
> that 
> mounts it?

In a general case? No.
If your plan is to use a filesystem that does not provide POSIX
permissions (i.e. FAT, NTFS, ISO9660 without extensions) - then it's
possible, and you generally need "uid" and "gid" mount options.
Otherwise your best bet is recursive chown or ACLs.


> (I know something about the -o uid and -o gid options, but (1) that would 
> only 
> work for one specific uid, and (2), iiuc, that works only for filesystems 
> that 
> don't use the Unix permissions (e.g., fat32, ntfs, ...).)

It seems to me that you're trying to solve this problem a wrong way.

A question one - why would you need a *user* to perform a backup?
User tend to disregard the importance of backups, tend to forget about
doing backups, and worse - tend to destroy a perfectly valid backup just
before it's actually needed.

Would not it be better to do a backup of users' files in a centralized
way on an admin (i.e. - you) controlled schedule?


A question two - "apt search backup" shows me at least half-dozen ready
to use (and free software) backup solution. Why bother implementing your
own?

Reco

Re: Having filesystems mounted with the user option be owned by the user that mounts them?

[Greg Wooledge]

On Fri, Sep 04, 2020 at 01:37:07PM -0400, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> I was hoping that if I used "user" (or "users") in the mount command (or in 
> /etc/fstab) that the mounted filesystem would be owned by the user that 
> mounted 
> it.  That doesn't (seem to) work.

It's not supposed to.  The "user" option in fstab simply allows a
non-root user to mount the file system.  It doesn't change the *contents*
of the file system.

  user   allow a user to mount

If you want to perform a file owner transformation on the contents of
the file system, then you need FS-specific options.  It really only
makes sense for FAT or NTFS file systems that don't have Unix owners
at all, so an owner transformation is *always* being performed.

Having filesystems mounted with the user option be owned by the user that mounts them?

[rhkramer]

I'm still working on my backup system, and setting up mount points.

I was hoping that if I used "user" (or "users") in the mount command (or in 
/etc/fstab) that the mounted filesystem would be owned by the user that mounted 
it.  That doesn't (seem to) work.

I could do things like give write permission to everyone, or set up a group 
with the users that I might want to be able to write to the backup, or set up 
a user for the specific purpose of doing backups, or do the backups as root, 
but none of those seem to be appropriate in one way or another.  

Is there a simple way to have the mounted filesystem be owned by the user that 
mounts it?

(I know something about the -o uid and -o gid options, but (1) that would only 
work for one specific uid, and (2), iiuc, that works only for filesystems that 
don't use the Unix permissions (e.g., fat32, ntfs, ...).)

Re: Re: history/history.db files appearing

[Humberto Massa]

The culprit is MAME (mame_0.206+dfsg.1-1 in my buster machine). I deleted
the directory, ran MAME thru the menu and voila, it showed up again.

changing .mame/io.ini so that the key historypath starts with .mame/ is
enough to make the problem disappear for me.

HTH,

-- 
[]s; Massa⠠⠵
via GMail Inbox

Re: virt-install returns error

[Marko Randjelovic]

On Tue, 1 Sep 2020 21:57:59 -0500
Charles Zeitler  wrote:

> [27901.892175] audit: type=1400 audit(1599004754.496:57):
> apparmor="DENIED" operation="open"
> profile="libvirt-845413b9-8775-499f-bfaa-bf583e4040ae"
> name="/sys/devices/system/node/" pid=9 comm="qemu-system-x86"
> requested_mask="r" denied_mask="r" fsuid=64055 ouid=0
> [27901.892187] audit: type=1400 audit(1599004754.496:58):
> apparmor="DENIED" operation="open"
> profile="libvirt-845413b9-8775-499f-bfaa-bf583e4040ae"
> name="/sys/devices/system/cpu/" pid=9 comm="qemu-system-x86"
> requested_mask="r" denied_mask="r" fsuid=64055 ouid=0

You have DENIED entries where apparmor prevents qemu-system-x86 to
access files /sys/devices/system/node/ and /sys/devices/system/cpu/.
Try to edit apparmor profile for qemu-system-x86 and reload it
afterwards. Profiles are located in /etc/apparmor.d. There are guides
on the web how to do it.

Regards,
Marko

Re: Journal

[Joe]

On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 14:44:31 -0700
David Christensen  wrote:

> On 2020-09-03 03:50, Joe wrote:
> > I've finally decided I have to keep a diary.
> > 
> > In Debian are RoboJournal and Lifeograph.
> > 
> > Neither of them actually function, at least in sid. Does anyone
> > have any other ideas, apart from phpMyAdmin or Mysql Workbench?  
> 
> Understand that, depending upon jurisdiction, you can be required to 
> disclose diaries, journals, calendars, etc., if you are ever involved
> in litigation.
> 

I don't record things I don't want lawyers to see at all...

I keep all my email, I take screenshots of completed online
transactions and record significant old-style purchases in a receipts
database. I have directories for clients and all the government rubbish.
That takes care of almost all my record-keeping needs. But occasionally
something happens which isn't any of these things. I can indeed just
keep a text file and add to it, but why do that when I have an SQL
database manager online at all times?

I didn't mention it, but I'd like these records to be available
remotely over ssh, which basically means TCP and no routing, which fits
nicely with MySQL/MariaDB. If I use a simple file, or something
web-based, I need OpenVPN for access, which like many Linux
applications, works perfectly some of the time.

-- 
Joe

Re: Journal

[Joe]

On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 11:32:18 -0700
Bob McGowan  wrote:

> On 9/3/20 11:20 AM, Joe wrote:
> > On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 11:11:56 -0400
> > Dan Ritter  wrote:
> > 
> >   
> >> Pelican is a static site generator. You write your content in
> >> MarkDown or RST, and then Pelican compiles it into a website by
> >> applying a theme and CSS styles.
> >>
> >> Performance is high, because your webserver is only handing out
> >> existing files. Security is high, because your webserver isn't
> >> allowing any writes to anything.
> >>
> >> My personal blog is at https://blog.randomstring.org
> >>
> >> You can see many examples at http://pelicanthemes.com
> >>
> >> Pelican is packaged for Debian. Although we are a few releases
> >> behind mainline, the difference is all in new features, not
> >> security.
> >>  
> > 
> > Thanks for all the suggestions. I'm not looking for a CMS system,
> > just a diary. Either Robojournal (if it was maintained) or
> > Lifeograph (if it worked at all) would be fine.  
> 
> I just installed Lifeograph, out of curiosity mostly.  It installed
> and runs, but does not have a modifiable window, is that what you
> mean by "not working"?
> 
> I maximized the window and there was then enough territory to
> actually see and read the stock "diaries".  Perhaps this is enough to
> help you? I have not yet tried to create my own diary, so there may
> be other issues I haven't hit yet.
> 
> If not, a clearer description of "if it worked at all" would be
> helpful.
> 

I doubt it. It took me a while to find that I had to press 'Edit' to
type anything at all. Having made one entry, I couldn't find any way to
add another. According to the instructions, double-clicking on a date
should do it, but nothing happened, the first entry was still displayed.
I opened the filter box and then it wouldn't close, and after clicking
various other things without effect, it hung and wouldn't redraw. 

I closed it and tried again, the first entry had been saved and could
be edited, but it behaved the same and I could add no further entries.
I think 'doesn't work at all' is the only realistic description.
Certainly completely unusable.

-- 
Joe