[Bug 1556602] Re: LVM in 16.04 cannot mount LVM Cached Volumes created in 15.10
I've restored my system to a working state by building lvm2 from upstream source that includes the referenced patch and using the compiled lvm to do a config backup which added the missing metadata attributes then using native lvm (lvm2 2.02.133-1ubuntu7) to restore the config backup. All is working now using lvm2 2.02.133-1ubuntu7 package. guy@mediaserver:~/tools$ sudo lvs LV lv_cache has invalid cache's feature flag. LV lv_cache is missing cache policy name. Internal error: LV segments corrupted in lv_cache. guy@mediaserver:~/tools$ sudo ./lvm vgcfgbackup -v Using volume group(s) on command line. Cache is missing cache policy, using mq. Cache is missing cache mode, using writethrough. Creating volume group backup "/etc/lvm/backup/vg1" (seqno 13). Volume group "vg1" successfully backed up. guy@mediaserver:~/tools$ sudo vgcfgrestore vg1 Restored volume group vg1 guy@mediaserver:~/tools$ sudo lvs LVVG Attr LSize Pool OriginData% Meta% Move Log Cpy%Sync Convert media vg1 Cwi---C--- 500.00g [lv_cache] [media_corig] -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1556602 Title: LVM in 16.04 cannot mount LVM Cached Volumes created in 15.10 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lvm2/+bug/1556602/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1556602] Re: LVM in 16.04 cannot mount LVM Cached Volumes created in 15.10
The patch referenced above does not have a related bug report in the upstream project. The earliest release version the patch is included in is lvm2 2.02.135 ** Summary changed: - LVM cannot mount LVM Cached Volumes from LMDE Betsy + LVM in 16.04 cannot mount LVM Cached Volumes created in 15.10 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1556602 Title: LVM in 16.04 cannot mount LVM Cached Volumes created in 15.10 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lvm2/+bug/1556602/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1556602] Re: LVM cannot mount LVM Cached Volumes from LMDE Betsy
At the very least, there should be a caveat in the 16.04 upgrade notes to state that any cached lvm volumes should have the caches removed before the upgrade. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1556602 Title: LVM cannot mount LVM Cached Volumes from LMDE Betsy To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lvm2/+bug/1556602/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1556602] Re: LVM cannot mount LVM Cached Volumes from LMDE Betsy
As I understand it, this bug affects any cached volumes created using the lvm2 package from 15.10 and then attempting to mount that volume under 16.04. I have this issue on two machines. As a workaroundon one of the machines I was able to mount the volume after booting into a 15.10 live environment, converting the lvs back to uncached volumes, booting back to 16.04 and converting to cached volumes again. Looking at the Fedora bug report this is caused by new cache metadata attributes missing in the metadata of volumes created using previous lvm2 version. A patch exists that adds default attributes to the cache metadata if they don't already exists and this will resolve the issue. Link to patch: https://www.redhat.com/archives/lvm- devel/2015-November/msg00098.html I'll check upstream to see if a bugreport exists for this lvm2 package. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1556602 Title: LVM cannot mount LVM Cached Volumes from LMDE Betsy To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lvm2/+bug/1556602/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1263162] Re: libvirt missing sanlock plugin
Still no sanlock driver in 14.10. I would be interested to hear if anyone has built this and what the steps involved would be. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1263162 Title: libvirt missing sanlock plugin To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/libvirt/+bug/1263162/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 944271] Re: iwlwifi: Microcode SW error detected. Restarting 0x2000000
System running 12.10 also experiencing the microcode error, resulting in drop outs, high packet loss and routing issues. $ lspci -v 04:00.0 Network controller: Intel Corporation WiFi Link 5100 Subsystem: Intel Corporation WiFi Link 5100 AGN Flags: bus master, fast devsel, latency 0, IRQ 44 Memory at d040 (64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=8K] Capabilities: access denied Kernel driver in use: iwlwifi Kernel modules: iwlwifi $uname -a Linux guy-ThinkPad-X100e 3.5.0-17-generic #28-Ubuntu SMP Tue Oct 9 19:31:23 UTC 2012 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux I can confirm disabling 11n option gives me a rock solid connection: $ sudo su $ echo 'options iwlwifi 11n_disable=1' /etc/modprobe.d/iwlwifi.conf $ rmmod iwlwifi $ modprobe iwlwifi -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/944271 Title: iwlwifi: Microcode SW error detected. Restarting 0x200 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/linux/+bug/944271/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 775104] Re: Kernel 2.6.38.8: ath5k driver wireless signal strength critically weak
I was experiencing this bug and can confirm that Seth's kernel fixes the issue. Connected to AP within seconds, previously would not connect unless I sat the laptop on top of the AP, and even then it was taking a good few minutes. Thanks Seth. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/775104 Title: Kernel 2.6.38.8: ath5k driver wireless signal strength critically weak To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/linux/+bug/775104/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 393012] Re: [SRU] smb: Error while copying file, Invalid argument
I can confirm the fix. I've also just updated Samba to 2:3.5.4~dfsg- 1ubuntu8.1 from maverick-proposed and it has resolved the issues for me. I am now able to copy large files to a Windows 2008 share without getting the Invalid Argument error and the files now copy fully instead of just 64KB. -- [SRU] smb: Error while copying file, Invalid argument https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/393012 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Server Team, which is subscribed to samba in ubuntu. -- Ubuntu-server-bugs mailing list Ubuntu-server-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server-bugs
[Bug 393012] Re: [SRU] smb: Error while copying file, Invalid argument
I can confirm the fix. I've also just updated Samba to 2:3.5.4~dfsg- 1ubuntu8.1 from maverick-proposed and it has resolved the issues for me. I am now able to copy large files to a Windows 2008 share without getting the Invalid Argument error and the files now copy fully instead of just 64KB. -- [SRU] smb: Error while copying file, Invalid argument https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/393012 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 549627] Re: Image containing EXIF orientation does not display properly as wallpaper
Hi, I did a dist-upgrade from Lucid to Maverick last week. I just checked a couple of images containing EXIF data and the bug is still present in Maverick. -- Image containing EXIF orientation does not display properly as wallpaper https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/549627 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 549627] Re: Image containing EXIF orientation does not display properly as wallpaper
Yes I did mean Lucid Beta 1 upgraded from Karmic. I've attached an image containing EXIF data to demonstrate. To recreate: Download Image Open gnome-appearance-properties Select background tab, then add.. Select the image you downloaded from the attachment The thumbnail image in gnome-appearance-settings will show the image as portrait, when applied as the background image it will display as landscape as the EXIF data has not been read. ** Attachment added: Image containing EXIF data http://launchpadlibrarian.net/42351234/dsc_3027.jpg -- Image containing EXIF orientation does not display properly as wallpaper https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/549627 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 527950] Re: [lucid] gwibber-service crashed with ResourceConflict in _request()
Occurred to me also after upgrading from 9.10 to 10.04 beta1. Only on first launch by selecting Broadcast Accounts Second attempt launched successfully. -- [lucid] gwibber-service crashed with ResourceConflict in _request() https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/527950 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 433714] Re: initial empathy account wizard does not offer IRC as an account
This is still present in Lucid Beta1. First account creation does not give IRC as an option. Creating any other chat account first then allows you to create an IRC account as the second account. -- initial empathy account wizard does not offer IRC as an account https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/433714 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 549627] [NEW] Image containing EXIF orientation does not display properly as wallpaper
Public bug reported: Binary package hint: gnome-control-center An image that contains EXIF orientation data displays correctly as a thumbnail in gnome-appearance-properties i.e gnome-appearance-properties reads the EXIF and rotates the image. However, when the thumbnail is selected and applied as wallpaper the orientation is not read and the wallpaper image is displayed with the wrong orientation. When bug #278332 (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome- control-center/+bug/278332) was fixed to show the previews correctly is it possible the preview was actually correct as that was what you would see if applied ? Using Karmic Beta1 upgraded from 9.10. gnome-control-center 1:2.29.92-0ubuntu3 ** Affects: gnome-control-center (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New -- Image containing EXIF orientation does not display properly as wallpaper https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/549627 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 324401] Re: 'No root filesystem is defined' error even though root fileystem has been defined
I tried that also and it was exactly the same. IIRC I finally got it to install by only selecting the one partition as / and not also selecting the boot partition, then manually moving kernel to the boot partition and editing /etc/fstab. -- 'No root filesystem is defined' error even though root fileystem has been defined https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/324401 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 324401] [NEW] 'No root filesystem is defined' error even though root fileystem has been defined
Public bug reported: Binary package hint: ubiquity Using the latest jaunty-desktop-amd64.iso from about a week ago. Trying to install from the live CD environment I chose manual partitioning setup, selected a blank preformatted partition for my root partition (/dev/sda7) and an existing ext2 boot partition (/dev/sda2), when I tried to go to the next step I got an error saying No root filesystem is defined. You can clearly see on the attached screenshot that a root filesystem was defined. After some fiddling about: * Deleting and recreating the root partition * Choosing ext3 instead of ext4 for the root partition * Selecting option for partitioner to format the partition, not selecting it and formatting myself I still got the error. I used apt-get to upgrade to the latest version of ubiquity and still got the same error. I finally got it to install by not selecting the boot partition, installing everything on the root partition (/dev/sda7). I have attached partman and syslog from /var/log/installer and also a screenshot showing the error message. (The logs may be fairly long due to all of the methods tried to get this installed) I do have an unusual partitioning scheme on the disk at present with partition numbers that do not represent the physical order on the disk! An intersting point to note from the partman log is that it sees the blank space between /dev/sda7 and /dev/sda5 as /dev/sda-1, i.e. a partition id of -1. ** Affects: ubiquity (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New -- 'No root filesystem is defined' error even though root fileystem has been defined https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/324401 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 324401] Re: 'No root filesystem is defined' error even though root fileystem has been defined
** Attachment added: syslog http://launchpadlibrarian.net/21906750/syslog -- 'No root filesystem is defined' error even though root fileystem has been defined https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/324401 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 324401] Re: 'No root filesystem is defined' error even though root fileystem has been defined
** Attachment added: partman http://launchpadlibrarian.net/21906772/partman -- 'No root filesystem is defined' error even though root fileystem has been defined https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/324401 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 324401] Re: 'No root filesystem is defined' error even though root fileystem has been defined
** Attachment added: screenshot http://launchpadlibrarian.net/21906798/Screenshot.png -- 'No root filesystem is defined' error even though root fileystem has been defined https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/324401 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 293278] Re: 8.10 Ibex does not support Xen - the package description fails to mention
I am a big Ubuntu advocate and when I needed to prepare two Xen virtual machine hosts, I naturally saw the packages were available and assumed Xen was supported. Only after I installed Ubuntu Server on both machines did I find there were no Xen kernel images provided. It is very disappointing to discover that the decision was made not to support Xen while Canonical are trying to push with the server product and virtualisation is becoming ever popular. I am now running openSuSE on these servers as an alternative due to the lack of Xen support. -- 8.10 Ibex does not support Xen - the package description fails to mention https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/293278 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 300443] Re: hal rejects to mount ntfs-3g partition
@Chris Coulson: Using Intrepid it looks like it is using ntfs-3g also: g...@guy-laptop:~$ sudo gnome-mount -vnbtd /dev/sda1 [sudo] password for guy: gnome-mount 0.8 Xlib: extension RANDR missing on display :0.0. ** (gnome-mount:14645): DEBUG: Mounting /org/freedesktop/Hal/devices/volume_uuid_D0C4C81DC4C807A4 ** (gnome-mount:14645): DEBUG: read default option 'locale=' from gconf strlist key /system/storage/default_options/ntfs-3g/mount_options ** (gnome-mount:14645): DEBUG: read default option 'exec' from gconf strlist key /system/storage/default_options/ntfs-3g/mount_options ** (gnome-mount:14645): DEBUG: Mounting /org/freedesktop/Hal/devices/volume_uuid_D0C4C81DC4C807A4 with mount_point='', fstype='ntfs-3g', num_options=2 ** (gnome-mount:14645): DEBUG: option='locale=en_GB.UTF-8' ** (gnome-mount:14645): DEBUG: option='exec' Mounted /dev/sda1 at /media/disk -- hal rejects to mount ntfs-3g partition https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/300443 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 316726] Re: startup crash after 2.24.3 update
e-e updated this morning, all working fine now. -- startup crash after 2.24.3 update https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/316726 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 300443] Re: hal rejects to mount ntfs-3g partition
Installing ntfs-config does not clear up the problem. As far as I am aware ntfs-config is a utility for mounting NTFS partitions, so yes you will be able to mount the partition using ntfs- config as a workaround but this does not offer a fix for the bug. -- hal rejects to mount ntfs-3g partition https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/300443 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 300443] Re: hal rejects to mount ntfs-3g partition
This is the verbose output I get: g...@guy-laptop:~$ gnome-mount -vnbtd /dev/sda1 gnome-mount 0.8 ** (gnome-mount:14910): DEBUG: Mounting /org/freedesktop/Hal/devices/volume_uuid_D0C4C81DC4C807A4 ** (gnome-mount:14910): DEBUG: read default option 'locale=' from gconf strlist key /system/storage/default_options/ntfs-3g/mount_options ** (gnome-mount:14910): DEBUG: read default option 'exec' from gconf strlist key /system/storage/default_options/ntfs-3g/mount_options ** (gnome-mount:14910): DEBUG: Mounting /org/freedesktop/Hal/devices/volume_uuid_D0C4C81DC4C807A4 with mount_point='', fstype='ntfs-3g', num_options=2 ** (gnome-mount:14910): DEBUG: option='locale=en_GB.UTF-8' ** (gnome-mount:14910): DEBUG: option='exec' ** Message: Mount failed for /org/freedesktop/Hal/devices/volume_uuid_D0C4C81DC4C807A4 org.freedesktop.Hal.Device.Volume.UnknownFailure : Cannot get volume.fstype.alternative -- hal rejects to mount ntfs-3g partition https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/300443 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 300443] Re: hal rejects to mount ntfs-3g partition
After some investigating I found that match key=@block.storage_device:storage.hotpluggable bool=true was not being matched. If I removed this match key clause, hal-device lists volume.fstype=ntfs- 3g instead of volume.fstype=ntfs and has the keys with the correct mount options. I can now mount the partition as normal by double clicking it's icon, however I am still asked to authenticate. I am unsure what effect removing the match key clause will have in other use cases, this could be left as is and volume.fstype.alternative key appended within match key=volume.fstype string=ntfs but outside of match key=@block.storage_device:storage.hotpluggable bool=true, but that makes no sense to me to look for an ntfs partition and then add ntfs-3g to a list of alternatives if the idea is to use ntfs-3g in the first place. Note: When I did modify 20-ntfs-3g-policy.fdi to append the volume.fstype.alternative key I got an error about an invalid mount object the first time I tried to mount, but it worked the second. I have attached my /usr/share/hal/fdi/policy/10osvendor/20-ntfs-3g- policy.fdi ** Attachment added: 20-ntfs-3g-policy.fdi http://launchpadlibrarian.net/20390451/20-ntfs-3g-policy.fdi -- hal rejects to mount ntfs-3g partition https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/300443 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 300443] Re: hal rejects to mount ntfs-3g partition
I tested the above commands and got the following results: (After each command was issued I attempted to open the partition by double clicking it's icon in 'Computer' and noted the error message) UDI of my NTFS partition from hal-device: /org/freedesktop/Hal/devices/volume_uuid_D0C4C81DC4C807A4 sudo hal-set-property --udi /org/freedesktop/Hal/devices/volume_uuid_D0C4C81DC4C807A4 --key volume.fstype.alternative --strlist-post ntfs-3g Cannot get volume.mount.valid_options sudo hal-set-property --udi /org/freedesktop/Hal/devices/volume_uuid_D0C4C81DC4C807A4 --key volume.mount.ntfs-3g.valid_options --strlist-post locale= Cannot mount volume. Invalid mount option when attempting to mount the volume. sudo hal-set-property --udi /org/freedesktop/Hal/devices/volume_uuid_D0C4C81DC4C807A4 --key volume.mount.ntfs-3g.valid_options --strlist-post exec This opened an authentication dialog saying something about the security policy didn't allow mounting of local disks. I entered my password and got the following error: Unable to mount location Internal error: No mount object for mounted volume I then double clicked the disk's icon and it opened as /media/disk as I would expect it to normally operate. -- hal rejects to mount ntfs-3g partition https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/300443 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
