Should one be able to install with only release + -security enabled?

[Nish Aravamudan]

Hi!

I have been testing a network-isolated Ubuntu mirror inside our network and
I am trying to understand if what I envision should work or not.

In particular, I am trying to minimize how much review is needed for
package updates, so I would like to just include the release and security
pockets. However, I am finding a few package updates (in Bionic in my case,
but I think Focal may also have this problem) that only have fixes in the
-updates pocket. This prevents installation from succeeding with preseed.

So far, I have seen apt-setup, but debootstrap and base-installer both need
some adjustment for my test environment.

Should we require -updates as well?

Thank you,
Nish
-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: When will PHP be upgraded to 7.4.5 for focal?

[Nish Aravamudan]

On Sun, May 31, 2020, 08:28 Colin Watson  wrote:

> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 08:49:58PM -0300, Elias Soares wrote:
> > Can someone tell me when php releases are released to official repository
> > for focal? PHP 7.4.4 is out few a few months and is not available yet for
> > ubuntu 20.04 lts
>
> In general, stable releases of Ubuntu only get individually-selected bug
> fixes, rather than whole new releases.  There are some exceptions, but I
> don't believe PHP is among them.  See:
>
>   https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates
>
> If there's a specific high-impact bug that was fixed in this newer
> upstream release, please make sure it's filed in Launchpad
>

Definitely file a bug if there's something specific. We have had a
Microrelease Exception for PHP in the past, particularly for the LTS
version(s).

Thanks,
Nish
-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: bugs in php-xajax with PHP7

[Nish Aravamudan]

On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 5:34 AM Robie Basak  wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 08:52:59PM -0500, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> > When I get some time, I'll go through PHP files and post a unified
> > diff, but I'm pretty busy, so it may be a while. This must be fixed,
> > though, or php-xajax is unusable as-is with PHP7.
>
> Thank you for offering a patch! Please see
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#Procedure for details on
> how to get these fixes landed in Ubuntu, and feel free to ask here if
> you have any questions.
>

For what it's worth, our version is the same as (basically) what is in
Debian now. Upstream is at a beta release and per this issue:
https://github.com/Xajax/Xajax/issues/40 still doesn't have PHP7 support.
There are some other recommendations in that ticket. Simplest choice may be
to remove php-xajax on 16.04+.

-Nish
-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: Ubuntu 19.04 (Disco) - Enigmail Security Issue

[Nish Aravamudan]

On Sat, May 11, 2019, 15:07 FK  wrote:

> Hi there,
>
> Is there any reason why enigmail is still at version 2.0.9 of Dec 2018,
> while 2.0.10 is available for quite some time?
>

Your $SUBJECT does not directly seem to have any relevance to the content
of your email. If there is a specific security issue, then you would be
most helpful by at least mentioning it here, but even better would be
filing a bug on launchpad.

Enigmail appears to be synced from Debian, and presumably there was not a
2.0.10 version there when the automatic Debian sync stopped.

Additionally, enigmail is in universe, which means only
community-supported, including for security.

Finally, the upstream enigmail does not mention any security fixes in
2.0.10, which is present in EE:
https://www.enigmail.net/index.php/en/download/changelog

-Nish

>
>
-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: ask for support packages for nfs-kernel-server

[Nish Aravamudan]

On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 11:31 AM  wrote:
>
> Dear,
>
> I'm trying to install the package nfs-kernel-server on my Ubuntu 10.04.

10.04 has been EOL for more than 4 years, since April 30, 2015.

-Nish
-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: smartmontools package requirements

[Nish Aravamudan]

Hi Zack,


On Wed, Jan 23, 2019, 23:22 Zack Coffey  Installed smartmontools and it required a bunch of other unneeded packages.
>
> Example: guile-2.0-libs libgc1c2 libgsasl7 libkyotocabinet16v5
> libmailutils5 libntlm0 mailutils mailutils-common postfix
>
> I don't want or need any mail utilities on every single machine that I
> need smartmontools on. Ok, I might want 'sendemail' at the very least, but
> I certainly do not need 'postfix'.
>
> Can we discuss removing some of these extra packages and make
> smartmontools a little more streamlined?
>

Are you possibly installing suggests or recommends of smartmontools? In
Disco (and afaict this was true in 16.04 too), none of what you mentioned
are listed as dependencies at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/disco/amd64/smartmontools/6.6-1.

Thanks,
Nish
-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: .deb package for Kitty Version: 0.11.3-1

[Nish Aravamudan]

On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 10:42 AM Keir Wayman  wrote:
>
>
> Ubuntu 10.04.1 LTS

Did you mean 18.04.1?

> Here's the thing, I thought you guys would like to know that this .deb
has some dangerous
> side effects, that's all. Yes doing things as root has dangers, but
that's how you install packages.

Doing *unsupported* things as root is doubly dangerous.

If you did indeed mean 18.04.1 above, then you are installing a package not
intended for your distribution by-hand.

In any case, I did exactly what you claim to have, and installed kitty and
kitty-terminfo from the debs built for 18.10 on 18.04 and no packages were
removed.

Thanks,
Nish
-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: .deb package for Kitty Version: 0.11.3-1

[Nish Aravamudan]

On Sat, Dec 8, 2018 at 10:51 AM Keir Wayman  wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> I installed the above on my Ubuntu 18.x system.

What specific version? 18.x is not a valid version string. 18.04 or 18.10?

> The installation deleted
> more than 90 packages including the gdebi package installer, the
> software-centre, ubuntu-cleaner & the usb disk creator.  It's a
> dangerous thing indeed!


Doing things as root is dangerous, yes. You can't blame a package for ...

>
>
> Yes, I know it tells you it's going to delete some packages before it
> starts, but really, this thing should have a health warning!

... ignoring information you admit you read.

-Nish
-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: iptables version upgrade timeline

[Nish Aravamudan]

Hi Paul,

On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 8:41 PM Paul David  wrote:
>
> Hey Nish,
>
> Thanks for your quick and very helpful response.  That clears up some of
> the confusion.  In this case, we'll probably go ahead with building our
> own package, or directly from upstream.

I would also suggest/recommend filing the Ubuntu bug anyways. It (IMO)
helps developers know what users care about, and in particular, is the only
"official" way anyone would know there might have been a bug to fix (even
if this one would be resolved as a feature request) if they are not
actively using iptables.

> One thing though;
>
> On 2018-11-27 at 03:31 AEDT+1100, quoth Nish Aravamudan:
> > Finally, note that if/when iptables is merged in the Disco cycle, it
will
> > move to 1.8.2-based, most likely, as that is the version in Debian
unstable
> > currently.
>
> That's fine, anything after 1.6.2 contains the feature / fix we're after
> (you're right, it's more of a feature, because it exposes a kernel
> option that previously wasn't available).
>
> Do you have any visibility on whether iptables will be upgraded in
> Disco?  I'm not asking for guarantees, just out of curiosity :).  Does
> it depend on when Debian promotes it to testing or stable?

No, it's unrelated to testing/stable, generally. Essentially, every cycle,
developers merge the Ubuntu delta (the bits that Ubuntu has in its source
packages that differ from Debian) with the latest in Debian (unstable).
It's still pretty early in Disco, so an iptables merge hasn't happened yet.
It's possible that it doesn't happen (as it didn't happen in Cosmic; but I
would have to go look at the publishing history in Debian to be sure, it's
also possible Debian didn't publish a newer version during Cosmic's cycle
before freeze), but it's more likely, I think, that it will happen at some
point. That's about as definitive as I can be, personally, since I did not
TIL (Touch It Last) and don't have any direct knowledge of it.

Thanks,
Nish
-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: iptables version upgrade timeline

[Nish Aravamudan]

Hi Paul,

On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 8:37 PM Paul David  wrote:
>
> Dear maintainers,
>
> We use the iptables package (currently version 1.6.1) from Ubuntu,
> currently we're running bionic.  However, there's a fix in upstream
> iptables as of release v1.6.2 which we want to use on our systems.
> Specifically, this commit:
> <
https://git.netfilter.org/iptables/commit/?id=8b0da2130b8af3890ef20afb2305f11224bb39ec
>.

A couple of points to mention.

While the base upstream version of the Ubuntu package is 1.6.1, that does
not mean the contents of the source used to build the package are identical
to the upstream 1.6.1 (you can see by the version string suffix (-2ubuntu2)
that two Debian releases relative to the upstream have occurred, and two
Ubuntu releases relative to that second Debian release). Looking at the
changelog (`apt-get changelog iptables`), though, it does not appear any of
these involved any upstream backports, which is what you are asking for.

Looking at the upstream commit, this appears to be a new feature, not a
fix? That is, leveraging an upstream kernel change. You may want to read
over https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates to understand what is and
is not considered appropriate for a SRU.

Finally, note that if/when iptables is merged in the Disco cycle, it will
move to 1.8.2-based, most likely, as that is the version in Debian unstable
currently.

> I noticed that on 
> that bionic, cosmic and disco distributions all have the same version of
> iptables package, namely v1.6.1.
>
> My question is, can we expect this package to be updated in LTS at some
> point, or should we come up with another solution?  We could manually
> build a package with a patch in it, but we're leery of doing that in our
> production systems.

It is unlikely, IMO, that iptables will be bumped to 1.6.2 or later in any
already-released version of Ubuntu. Instead, a SRU of the above feature,
could be requested, via a bug against the iptables source package:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/iptables. However, without
knowing for sure this is a bugfix, I am not sure it satisifies the SRU
rules (it doesn't hurt to file the bug nonetheless). You might just get a
response of Wishlist-Invalid, or so.

Thanks,
Nish
-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: apt update behaves differently from apt-get update

[Nish Aravamudan]

On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 9:46 AM Lao Shaw  wrote:

> On my freshly installed ubuntu 18.06 my cron job use 'apt-get' as 'apt' is
> not recommended to be used in scripts. however, 'apt-get update' will keep
> back my packages while 'apt upgrade' will upgrade them, this is not
> expected.
>

I think you have the wrong mailing list, but, `man apt` says:

   apt provides a high-level commandline interface for the package
   management system. It is intended as an end user interface and
enables
   some options better suited for interactive usage by default compared
to
   more specialized APT tools like apt-get(8) and apt-cache(8).

This does not make me think that `apt` and `apt-get` are intended to have
the same behavior in all operations (given that some options are explicitly
(well the "some" is explicit, which actually are is not) enabled in `apt`
only by default.

Thanks,
Nish
-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: libv8-3.14-dev

[Nish Aravamudan]

Hello,

On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 2:58 AM, jaroslav.svoboda <
jaroslav.svob...@alumnos.upm.es> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> is there a reason why libv8-3.14-dev and libv8-3.14 packages are not
> available for arm64 (particularly in Bionic)? I read there was an issue few
> years ago when V8 did not recognized ARMv8 but that should be fixed by now.
> https://packages.ubuntu.com/bionic/arm64/libv8-3.14-dev just does not
> exist even though search links there.
>

It is not one of the architectures explicitly listed in the source
packages's debian/control and debian/rules files.

-Nish
-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: I've noticed this on multiple machine's of mine, terminal output.

[Nish Aravamudan]

Hello David,

I believe this might be
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/avahi/+bug/1760128

-Nish

On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 4:53 AM, David Evans DCRNC
 wrote:
> root@DMESAMM8:~# aptitude full-upgrade
> The following packages will be upgraded:
>   avahi-dnsconfd
> 1 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
> Need to get 0 B/14.1 kB of archives. After unpacking 0 B will be used.
> Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?] y
> (Reading database ... 856145 files and directories currently installed.)
> Preparing to unpack .../avahi-dnsconfd_0.6.32~rc+dfsg-1ubuntu2.1_amd64.deb
> ...
> Job for avahi-daemon.socket canceled.
> dpkg: warning: subprocess old pre-removal script returned error exit status
> 1
> dpkg: trying script from the new package instead ...
> Job for avahi-daemon.socket canceled.
> dpkg: error processing archive
> /var/cache/apt/archives/avahi-dnsconfd_0.6.32~rc+dfsg-1ubuntu2.1_amd64.deb
> (--unpack):
>  subprocess new pre-removal script returned error exit status 1
> Errors were encountered while processing:
>  /var/cache/apt/archives/avahi-dnsconfd_0.6.32~rc+dfsg-1ubuntu2.1_amd64.deb
> E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)
> Failed to perform requested operation on package.  Trying to recover:
> root@DMESAMM8:~#
>
>
> Noticed on 3+ machines all different hardware configurations & physical
> system profiles, same terminal error output, wanted to report before but
> sorry took me till just now.
>
>
> Thanks for your time,
>
> -Dave.
>
>
> --
> Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
> Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: Samba CVE-2018-1057

[Nish Aravamudan]

Hi James,

On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 4:30 AM, James Boland  wrote:
> Hi there,
>
>
>
> Are there any plans to upgrade the current Samba package to mitigate again
> the recent security bug in CVE-2018-1057 ?

https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/2018/CVE-2018-1057.html

Thanks,
Nish

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: Where is the Git repo for the Ubuntu packaging branch for Dovecot package?

[Nish Aravamudan]

On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 9:57 AM, Jaime Hablutzel Egoavil
 wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 5:04 PM, Daniel Llewellyn 
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On 1 Mar 2018, at 21:32, Jaime Hablutzel Egoavil 
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi, I'm looking for the Git repository up to the following Dovecot
>> > version, 2.2.27-3ubuntu1.2.
>> >
>> > I found out that I can download the following files:
>> >   •
>> > https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+archive/primary/+files/dovecot_2.2.27.orig.tar.gz
>> >   •
>> > https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+archive/primary/+files/dovecot_2.2.27-3ubuntu1.2.debian.tar.xz
>>
>> You’re nearly there.
>>
>> For future reference you can go to https://launchpad.net/ubuntu and use
>> the “Packages” search field underneath the description to find packages.
>>
>> The Dovecot page is at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dovecot
>> The Dovecot source repos are listed at
>> https://code.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dovecot for old bzr repos, and
>> https://code.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dovecot/+git for git.
>>
>> It looks like you want the git repo whose details are shown at
>> https://code.launchpad.net/~usd-import-team/ubuntu/+source/dovecot/+git/dovecot
>
>
> Thanks Daniel, this repo is exactly what I was looking for. Unfortunately,
> its link is not readily available and furthermore it under an "Other
> repositories" heading so the first time I stumble upon it I though it was
> some sort of private/personal repository.

It will be changing shortly, once things get reimported and we defualt
the srcpkg repo to it.

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: Where is the Git repo for the Ubuntu packaging branch for Dovecot package?

[Nish Aravamudan]

On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 10:01 AM, Jaime Hablutzel Egoavil
 wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 3:21 AM, Robie Basak  wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 10:04:56PM +, Daniel Llewellyn wrote:
>> > It looks like you want the git repo whose details are shown at
>> > https://code.launchpad.net/~usd-import-team/ubuntu/+source/dovecot/+git/dovecot
>>
>> Please note that this is currently an experimental git view. We're
>> actively working on making this "official" and reliable, but we're still
>> at an early phase and there will be some disruption to the git
>> repository before we get to production status.
>
>
> Wouldn't it be a good idea to merge the list of all Bazaar and Git
> repositories under a single page like
> https://code.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dovecot instead of requiring to
> click an small and imperceptible "View Git repositories" link?.

No, the plan is to simple switch the default view to Git for packages
as we 'officially' import them.

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: ubuntu-dock-gnome

[Nish Aravamudan]

On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 5:59 AM, J Fernyhough  wrote:
> On 5 February 2018 at 13:53, Ralf ranfyy  wrote:
>> It's better to do it the "Debian way":
>> $ apt source gnome-shell-extension-ubuntu-dock
>>
>> sudo not required. This way you get the original source + patches applied
>> (if any).
>
> Cool, plenty of ways to get the source depending on what you want to
> do with it, though any improvements/fixes/changes to the software
> (rather than the package) should probably go upstream first.
>
> If you want the Ubuntu-specific source I'll add another option based
> on the .dsc file on the package page,
>
> dget -u 
> http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/pool/main/g/gnome-shell-extension-ubuntu-dock/gnome-shell-extension-ubuntu-dock_0.9.dsc
>
> :)

There is also `pull-lp-source` and `pull-debian-source`, which do not
require knowing the DSC url nor modifying your sources.list.

-Nish

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: Add http2 support to curl

[Nish Aravamudan]

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 7:27 AM, Hamid Alaei V.  wrote:
> Hi,
> Can you build curl2 with --with-nghttp2? PHP needs that to be able to send
> http2 requests.

See comments 7 ad 8 at
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nghttp2/+bug/1687454

Thanks,
Nish

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: iproute2

[Nish Aravamudan]

Hello Monique,

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 8:06 AM, Monique van den Berg
 wrote:
> Goodday Mr Basak
>
> Thank you for your reply.
> The patch I would like to have backported is already in upstream.
> Would I still need to follow the procedure outlined in this document?
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates

Yes, did you read the document and what it is for? I think it should
be clear that it doesn't really matter where the fix is, if you are
trying to get the fix into an existing release, you must follow the
SRU procedures.

-Nish

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: 8.0.32-1ubuntu1.3~ppa2 patches not in tomcat8 8.0.32-1ubuntu1.4

[Nish Aravamudan]

Hi Jack,

On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 5:33 PM, Jack Howarth
 wrote:
> Nish,
>  Nevermind. I manually installed your previous test packages under
> current xenial and those changes don't solve the breakage in running the
> MetaboAnalyst war under tomcat8 on ubuntu. As I mentioned before, when using
> glassfish there is no problems running MetaboAnalyst but under tomca8, one
> gets...

At this point, please file a bug:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/tomcat8/+filebug with the
below information.

Thanks,
Nish

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: 8.0.32-1ubuntu1.3~ppa2 patches not in tomcat8 8.0.32-1ubuntu1.4

[Nish Aravamudan]

On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Jack Howarth
 wrote:
> Nish,
>Can you recreate your test packaging on
> https://launchpad.net/~nacc/+archive/ubuntu/tomcat8v2/+packages based off of
> the current tomcat8 package in xenial? I would be happy to test if your
> proposed bug fixes resolve the problems with ubuntu's tomcat failing to run
> the MetaboAnalyst war application properly.

Yep, I'm happy to do that hopefully tomorrow. Do you know which bug is
affecting you from the ones I listed?

Thanks,
Nish

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: 8.0.32-1ubuntu1.3~ppa2 patches not in tomcat8 8.0.32-1ubuntu1.4

[Nish Aravamudan]

On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 12:00 PM, Robie Basak  wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 09:48:06AM -0400, Jack Howarth wrote:
>>Is there a reason that the patches present in the test tomcat8
>> 8.0.32-1ubuntu1.3~ppa2 were dropped from tomcat8 8.0.32-1ubuntu1.4?
>
> Where were you getting 8.0.32-1ubuntu1.3~ppa2 from? That doesn't sound
> like something that would have been published by Ubuntu.

I believe that is referring to the version in  my PPA at
https://launchpad.net/~nacc/+archive/ubuntu/tomcat8v2/+packages. It
feels more productive to contact me directly, but on the list is fine
too.

That test build was for several LP bugs for tomcat8.

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/tomcat8/+bug/1593854 - no
response to latest testing yet
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/tomcat7/+bug/1482893 - no
testing feedback
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/tomcat8/+bug/1606331 -
tested successfully
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/tomcat8/+bug/1644144 - no
testing feedback

It's hard for me, with confidence, to upload fixes to the archive with
no testing feedback. And, it's not uncommon for there to be "races"
between uploaders -- in this case, ubuntu1.4 has a fix for a totally
unrelated bug to the above.

-Nish

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: Source file bind9

[Nish Aravamudan]

On 08.04.2017 [04:23:06 +], Alexandre Vilarinho wrote:
> Hello all
> I'm trying to get the source file for bind9, so I can compile it to support 
> MySQL, but when I run the following command I get an error informing that the 
> source code wasn't found.
> root@Linux-Services-Server:/usr/local/src/bind9# apt-get build-dep 
> bind9Reading package lists... DoneE: Unable to find a source package for bind9
> root@Linux-Services-Server:/usr/local/src/bind9# apt-get source bind9Reading 
> package lists... DoneE: Unable to find a source package for 
> bind9root@Linux-Services-Server:/usr/local/src/bind9# 

Do you have any deb-src lines in /etc/apt/sources.list?

Alternatively, use `pull-lp-source` as Mathieu said.

-Nish

-- 
Nishanth Aravamudan
Ubuntu Server
Canonical Ltd

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: dosbox 0.74-4.2build1 amd64 produces runtime-errors (now)

[Nish Aravamudan]

On 06.03.2017 [10:34:06 +], Nico Schumann wrote:
> Hello dear package maintainers, after a new installation from lubuntu
> 16.4LTS to lubuntu 16.10, dosbox doesn't work anymore correctly. Now I
> get this runtime error when I'm runing some games:
> Exit to error: DRC64:Unhandled memory reference
> On lubuntu 16.4 LTS, dosbox works fine at them. I looked for the 16.4
> LTS package version here, and it seems that's the same version like in
> 16.10. Hence I think, the failure could be due building with a
> different compiler/-version then it was been build at 16.4 LTS.

It is best to search for existing bug reports first, I think:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dosbox

And there is:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dosbox/+bug/1569438

Thanks,
Nish

-- 
Nishanth Aravamudan
Ubuntu Server
Canonical Ltd

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: n2n package

[Nish Aravamudan]

On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 7:30 AM, Luděk Sladký  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this mailing list is written as onwer of package called n2n in ubuntu
> repository. There is a bug in scripts. Is it possible to repair it?
>
> There is variable N2N_DAEMON_OPTS in /etc/default/n2n config file. I
> use this variable for netmask or for settings MTU.
>
> This variable for settings netmask may be like:
> N2N_DAEMON_OPTS="-s 255.255.0.0"
>
> but, in init scripts this variable is not used (in /etc/init.d/n2n)
>
> There is in line 69:
> -f -a $N2N_IP -c $N2N_COMMUNITY -l $N2N_SUPERNODE:$N2N_SUPERNODE_PORT \
>
> I thing that correct may be:
> -f -a $N2N_IP -c $N2N_COMMUNITY -l $N2N_SUPERNODE:$N2N_SUPERNODE_PORT
> $N2N_DAEMON_OPTS \
>
> I rewrote this and it works well. Could you repair in repository?

Please file a bug at https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/n2n/+filebug.

-Nish

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: TCPDump Version

[Nish Aravamudan]

On 03.02.2017 [08:58:45 -0500], Sephiroth Storm wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Your repos currently have 4.7.x as the latest version of tcpdump
> available when it is up to 4.9.x. As your version of tcpdump may have
> numerous vulnerabilities, when will the repo be populated with the
> updated version?

Zesty (17.04) has 4.9.0-1ubuntu1.

4.7.4 is present in 16.04 and 16.10, though -- what vulnerabilities are
you considering as present? Are there CVEs for them? That's the normal
process for vulnerabilities to be fixed in released versions, I think.
Also, you may want to read https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates,
which explains how updates occur in released versions (note that the
implication is you're unlikely to see 4.9.0 in 16.04).

-Nish

-- 
Nishanth Aravamudan
Ubuntu Server
Canonical Ltd

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: git workflows for general Ubuntu development

[Nish Aravamudan]

On 15.11.2016 [09:57:56 +1300], Michael Hudson-Doyle wrote:
> On 15 November 2016 at 01:51, Robie Basak  wrote:
> 
> > On the server team, we've been working on a process that uses git to do
> > our "Ubuntu merges". As a consequence, we now have a mechanism that can
> > import package histories into git on Launchpad. We think that this work
> > opens up a bunch of new possibilities, such as for drive-by contributors
> > submitting merge proposals entirely through git.
> >
> 
> This is pretty exciting! Do you think your work will fulfil the goals of
> the UDD project or is there still some stuff that's out of scope?

Is there a list of those goals? I have never used UDD and wasn't
contributing to Ubuntu when it was in-use.

> > We'll be talking about our work tomorrow, as part of the Ubuntu Online
> > Summit. The session page is at
> > http://summit.ubuntu.com/uos-1611/meeting/22710/git-based-merge-workflow/
> > and is currently scheduled for 2016-11-15 18:00 UTC. Times may change,
> > so be sure to check the schedule tomorrow.
> >
> > I originally wrote about this in August 2014
> > (https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2014-August/038418.html).
> > We've come on a long way since then. Our automated git imports preserve
> > histories. Where relevant, Ubuntu packages are correctly parented from
> > their Debian origins. We hope to start running this live soon, which
> > will import package uploads into our git trees as they happen rather
> > than on-demand. Once this is live, anyone will be able to easily clone
> > from the "current" Ubuntu packaging git trees, which we think is useful
> > in itself.
> >
> > If you're interested, we'd love your feedback. What are your use cases?
> > What sort of workflows would you like to see? You can see some further
> > notes of ours as they form in the pad on the session page linked above.
> > What have we missed?
> >
> 
> The two questions I have (which are touched on but not afaics really
> answered in the notes are) 1) how does this work if I already maintain the
> packaging for some package in git? 2) what about dgit?

1) No impact to you -- we currently don't have plans to 'import the
world' (meaning all source packages). If the importer were to run
against that source package, though, it would simply import the source
package(s) according to Launchpad's publishing history in Debiand and
Ubuntu. What is most interesting, perhaps, is that you can push
'upload/' tags to the repository the importer uses (presuming
permissions) and the importer will recognize that tag, compare it to the
corresponding upload in Launchpad (source package comparison) and if
they match, it will use the upload-tag as the imported-commit, and
parent it into the history. So if you have broken-out changes (and this
is true for merges too) in your git tree, you can use the upload/ tags
to reflect that. There is no presumption of common ancestry, so the
resulting history (if you have a separate repository right now), might
look a little strange, but it should work :)

It's a bit hand-wavy written out like that, so feel free to ping me on
IRC (nacc) and I'll try and help clarify.

2) dgit does not fully meet our needs at this time. It's going to be
something Robie covers in more detail in the UOS session, but hopefully
he'll be able to respond here, as well.

Thanks,
Nish

-- 
Nishanth Aravamudan
Ubuntu Server
Canonical Ltd

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: Wrong version in version.hpp of ViennaCL library 1.7.1 installed by apt-get

[Nish Aravamudan]

On 17.10.2016 [09:51:38 -0700], Andrew Musselman wrote:
> Thanks; will let the upstream project know.

Note that upstream already fixed this:
https://github.com/viennacl/viennacl-dev/commit/2287c217f03ce115cca0fd00c95ddf200badb2f9

Seems like they should either release 1.7.2 or 1.7.1.1 to fix this
issue.

-Nish

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: Wrong version in version.hpp of ViennaCL library 1.7.1 installed by apt-get

[Nish Aravamudan]

On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 6:27 PM, Andrew Musselman
 wrote:
> Notes at https://github.com/viennacl/viennacl-dev/issues/205
>
> I don't know if this is a ViennaCL release issue or a packaging issue so
> posting both places.

Looks to be an upstream issue with the release:
https://github.com/viennacl/viennacl-dev/blob/release-1.7.1/viennacl/version.hpp

-Nish

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: Composer package outdated version

[Nish Aravamudan]

Hello,

On 14.09.2016 [15:18:22 +0300], Vladislav Shumkin wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Can you please update composer version to the latest one in your
> repositories. Its way too old for development purposes.
> I would like to rely on system auto-update, rather than to install the
> composer executable manually and maintain it manually.

Debian unstable (and 16.10) have 1.1.3-1.

16.04 has 1.0.0~beta2-1, which was current at the time of release.

If you have specific bugs that you are hitting with 16.04, please file
bugs against composer and indicate what the issue(s) are.

Thanks,
Nish

-- 
Nishanth Aravamudan
Ubuntu Server
Canonical Ltd

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: Bug on Grafana package on ubuntu 16.04

[Nish Aravamudan]

On 13.09.2016 [19:13:02 +], Thomas Fragstein wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> 
> there is a bug on the grafana package on ubuntu 16.04.
> 
> the simple bugfix are that icons are missing on the webpage of grafana.
> 
> a longer description can be found there 
> https://github.com/grafana/grafana/issues/4712
> 
> 
> so my question. Its a known bug on ubuntu site?

Is this the same as the bug report at
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=815335 ?

It would seem 16.10 has this fixed, as it has 2.6.0+dfsg-3, if so.
Someone would need to file a bug for an SRU
(https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates) for 16.04, if desired.

-Nish

-- 
Nishanth Aravamudan
Ubuntu Server
Canonical Ltd

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: Purge bug for nagios3

[Nish Aravamudan]

On 02.09.2016 [16:27:30 +0200], g...@free.fr wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I think you have a bug in the purge procedure for nagios3.

I think you might be right :)

> I use Linux Mint 17.2 using ubuntu packages.
> 
> I installed nagios3 (sudo apt-get install nagios3), tested, and decided not
> to use it. I so uninstalled nagios3 using purge (sudo apt-get purge
> nagios3). I don't remember some special message, or I didn't see it, but
> after that, apache crashed.

Note that I didn't see any error on purging nagios3 itself, but trying
to purge nagios3 does lead to issues.

It seems like /usr/share/nagios3/debian/httpd.webapps-common is quite
crufty, in particular referring to /etc/apache2/conf.d rather than
/etc/apache2/conf-{available,enabled} as has been the case since
2.4.1-1. It seems like the helper might be removeable, or at least
updated to use either the correct paths (which in cursory testing allows
for purge to succeed) or a2enconf/a2disconf rather than direct symlink
manipulation.

Would you be willing to file a bug on launchpad against nagios3 for
this?

Thanks,
Nish

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: systemd samba units

[Nish Aravamudan]

On 03.09.2016 [04:55:13 -0400], Tom H wrote:
> Could Ubuntu ship samba systemd units with the same names as upstream?
> 
> Ubuntu's shipping nmbd, samba (masked), samba-ad-dc, and smbd, whereas
> upstream's shipping nmb, samba (equivalent to samba-ad-dc), and smb.

This seems like a valid request, but maybe worth bringing up to the
Debian maintainers too, as the debian/rules lines that are relevant:

install -m 0644 packaging/systemd/*.service 
$(DESTDIR)/lib/systemd/system/
mv $(DESTDIR)/lib/systemd/system/nmb.service 
$(DESTDIR)/lib/systemd/system/nmbd.service
mv $(DESTDIR)/lib/systemd/system/smb.service 
$(DESTDIR)/lib/systemd/system/smbd.service
mv $(DESTDIR)/lib/systemd/system/samba.service 
$(DESTDIR)/lib/systemd/system/samba-ad-dc.service

are, afaict, unchanged from Debian in the current package. Also, it
feels like the naming is mostly due to the fact that the executables are
named the same (/usr/sbin/{s,n}mbd), so manpages, etc. would need
updating correspondingly.

> It'd be helpful and kind to those of who use multiple distros - as
> well as for those who google for documentation.
> 
> It would also prevent the small mistake that's creeped into
> smbd.service: it has "nmb.service" instead of "nmbd.service" in its
> "After=" line.

This probably deserves a bug in Debian/Ubuntu.

sed -i \
  -e 's|/etc/sysconfig/|/etc/default/|' \
  -e 's|/nmb\.service|nmbd.service|' \
  -e 's|/smb\.service|smbd.service|' \
  -e 's|/samba\.service|samba-ad-dc.service|' \
  $(DESTDIR)/lib/systemd/system/*.service

It seems like the use of a preceding / in the last 3 seds may be an
oversight/c&p error. Again, present in Debian too.

Thanks,
Nish

-- 
Nishanth Aravamudan
Ubuntu Server
Canonical Ltd

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: The Simple Things in Life

[Nish Aravamudan]

On 19.07.2016 [15:01:46 -0700], Markus Lankeit wrote:
> Adding my $0.02...
> 
> If you pick "samba file server" during install, libnss-winbind
> libpam-winbind are not installed by default.  It took me a long to time to
> track down why in 16.04 I can "join" an AD domain just fine, but domain
> users get "access denied" to samba file shares. Not sure the logic behind
> not installing relevant packages...

Thanks for bringing this up -- I think this is due to libpam-smbpass
being removed/deprecated and being replaced with libpam-winbind. I will
file a post-release FFe bug (unless you've already filed a bug?) to
change the seed for xenial, we'll see what happens.  I've already
updated the 16.10 seeds to install libpam-winbind.

Note that earlier Ubuntu releases did not require (I'm guessing?)
libnss-winbind (libpam-winbind suggests it, but doesn't require it). In
your environment, is it strictly necessary in order to join the AD
domain?

Thanks,
Nish
-- 
Nishanth Aravamudan
Ubuntu Server
Canonical Ltd

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

[RFC] State of cobbler (universe)

[Nish Aravamudan]

Hi!

So we are now (16.10) in sync with Debian, but that package is sadly
quite broken.  Tbh, the old package in Universe was also broken, just
for different reasons. The reason now is the Debian package has issues.

The package as currently done by Debian simply doesn't work. I'm not
sure it even works in the context of openstack/fuel in Debian (which is
the reason I think it's packaged the way it is in Debian based upon the
git logs); and if it does, it *only* works for fuel and no other
purpose.

I see 4 ways forward:

1) We leave it broken in universe: it sucks, but no one is spending time
on it now, beyond filing bugs. There are well-established workarounds
(that I as an upstream developer of Cobbler have recommended): build
from source or use the community .deb packages.

In this case, I would rewrite any documentation we currently provide (I
think there are at least Ubuntu wiki pages) to not refer to our package
and to either guide users to build from git or use the Cobbler .deb
packages.

2) We fix it in Universe. I've started doing this, primarily by
backporting from upstream, but the list of fixes is growing quite large.
And where the fix isn't from upstream, I'm basically just undoing the
Debian packaging. I have sent some patches to Debian, and also asked for
clarification on the Debian packaging effort to the openstack list
(listed maintainer), as I think it's misguideded and leading to bad
packages.

3) We update Cobbler to the latest upstream (`uscan`/`uupdate` works),
which fixes a handful of bugs we have. I have fixes for the other open
Cobbler bugs and I think I could upstream most of them.

4) We blacklist Cobbler and stop carrying the package. I'm starting to
lean towards this approach, honestly. We should not be shipping this
package and should just drop it from the archive in the state it's in
(and I would almost suggest doing this in Xenial, but the package is so
broken there that it's the same as removing it -- no one I know has
gotten the 16.04 version to work, nor do I think they really could,
without basically rewriting parts of the Python source).

Thoughts/opinions/suggestions? I have used Cobbler heavily in the past,
and it can be a very powerful tool. I would like it to be easy to use
with Ubuntu, and am just not sure of the right way to go about that.

-Nish

-- 
Nishanth Aravamudan
Ubuntu Server
Canonical Ltd

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: python(3)-h5py not mpi-aware

[Nish Aravamudan]

On 30.06.2016 [16:17:31 +0200], Lars Bungum wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> running this script:
> 
> import mpi4py
> from mpi4py import MPI
> import h5py
> 
> rank = MPI.COMM_WORLD.rank  # The process ID (integer 0-3 for 4-process run)
> 
> print(rank)
> f = h5py.File('parallel_test.hdf5', 'w', driver='mpio', comm=MPI.COMM_WORLD)
> 
> dset = f.create_dataset('test', (4,), dtype='i')
> dset[rank] = rank
> 
> f.close()
> 
> yields this result, for both python versions for as well 14.04 as 16.04
> (Kubuntu):
> 
> $ mpirun -np 4 python3 multiproc_hdf5_mpi4py.py
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>   File "multiproc_hdf5_mpi4py.py", line 1, in 
> import mpi4py
> ImportError: No module named 'mpi4py'

Do you have either python-mpi4py or python3-mpi4py installed?

-Nish

--
Nishanth Aravamudan
Ubuntu Server
Canonical Ltd

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: Kernel issues since -22

[Nish Aravamudan]

On 22.06.2016 [12:43:46 -0700], Dale Amon wrote:
> I have not got a whole lot of information because this happens
> so early in the boot. Basically, no kernel since -22 works on
> my Lenovo W520. If I were to hazard a guess, I would say it has
> to do with some race condition in the systemctl set up. Even
> in -22 I often must boot several times before it succeeds, although
> the failures in it seem to be different.

That seems buggy in and of itself. You're sure the hardware is stable?

> Has anyone else reported similar show-stopper issues in
> recent kernels?

I would probably check the existing bugs and maybe file one.

-Nish

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: Paket: python-moinmoin (1.9.7-1ubuntu2)

[Nish Aravamudan]

Hi Oliver,

On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 10:29 PM, Oliver Schäfer
 wrote:
> Dear Ubuntu developers,
>
> I was wondering why the package python-moinmoin is still at moinmoin version
> 1.9.7. Since over a year the new version 1.9.8 is out in which important
> security issues were fixed (according to moinmoin's website some major
> installations of the Wiki software experienced severe damage due to these).
> Therefore we currently have 1.9.8 installed from a tar-ball but our
> IT-department is not too happy with this, as the needed manual care
> introduces other security risks. Is there a reason why this package is not
> getting updated?

It would be best to give the context in which are you looking.

Xenial and Yakkety have 1.9.8-1ubuntu1, so seem to be fine.

Precise and Trusty do not have said update, so I guess you mean those?
Precise has received security updates since release, for CVEs, but is
on quite an older base.

Do you have a reference to the MoinMoin-documented issues? The page I
found in cursory searching: https://moinmo.in/SecurityFixes just says
1.9.8 "Fixes issues found in 1.9.7." I'm guessing that there is no
corresponding CVE-like issue filed, so the -security team may not be
aware of a need to fix any issues (not 100% on that). Have you filed a
bug with Ubuntu for the issues that required you to use 1.9.8?

Thanks,
NIsh

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: libapache2-mod-auth-mysql

[Nish Aravamudan]

Hi Ralph,

On 03.06.2016 [12:33:35 -0400], Ralph Henselman wrote:
> This is still a widely used authentication module.  Years of data
> gathering will be lost without it.

This package was removed from Ubuntu on August 8, 2015 (Wily):
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mod-auth-mysql/+publishinghistory
because it has been removed from Debian:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=788638.

According to the Debian bug report, mysql authentication is native in
apache2 and does not require a separately packaged module. Finally, the
Debian package has been indicated as broken for 2 years prior to the
Debian removal.

In the future, it would be helpful if more context was given, as I had
to presume you were referring to the package's removal from 16.04.

Thanks,
Nish

-- 
Nishanth Aravamudan
Ubuntu Server
Canonical Ltd

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: Vagrant Bug is fixed on Debian, please, sync it with Xenial...

[Nish Aravamudan]

On 18.05.2016 [19:51:43 -0400], Martinx - ジェームズ wrote:
> Guys,
> 
>  Can someone, please, close this bug:
> 
>  https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/vagrant/+bug/1559420
> 
>  The fix is already available on Debian.

That's not how SRU works?

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates

-Nish

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: Why is package libpam-smbpass removed?

[Nish Aravamudan]

On 08.03.2016 [17:29:11 +0100], Linus Eklöf wrote:
> If it is planned to have libpam-smbpass removed from 16.04, shouldn't there
> be a change in nautilus-share as well so only guest access authentication
> is possible?

Possibly, I have no idea :) I was just trying to provide you an answer
to your original question.

> Right now it might be rather confusing to share a folder and it just won't
> work unless you configure samba manually, and if you are comfortable with
> that then maybe nautilus-share isn't even necessary.

I think this would be worth a bug if there isn't already one filed about
it.

-Nish

> 2016-03-08 17:02 GMT+01:00 Nish Aravamudan :
> 
> > On 08.03.2016 [14:12:46 +0100], Linus Eklöf wrote:
> > > This breaks the easy set up for folder sharing in nautilus since only the
> > > guest access will work unless setting up samba manually.
> > >
> > > Is this intended or should this feature be present and filed as a bug?
> >
> > Looking at the src:samba package:
> > https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/samba, it's still published for
> > Xenial.
> >
> > Investigating the binary packages generated, though, you're right
> > libpam-smbpass is no longer generated.
> >
> > Ah, the changelog
> > (https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/samba/+changelog) says:
> >
> > 2:4.1.20+dfsg-1ubuntu4
> > Superseded in xenial-proposed on 2015-12-16
> > samba (2:4.1.20+dfsg-1ubuntu4) xenial; urgency=medium
> >
> >   * Backport Debian change to remove libpam-smbpasswd, it segfaults
> > leading to non working session (lp: #1515207)
> >
> >  -- Sebastien Bacher <...>  Wed, 16 Dec 2015 11:47:44 +0100
> >
> > That bug is:
> > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/samba/+bug/1515207 and c#1
> > there indicates Debian has also removed this package.
> >
> > -Nish
> >
> >
> > --
> > Nishanth Aravamudan
> > Ubuntu Server
> > Canonical Ltd
> >

-- 
Nishanth Aravamudan
Ubuntu Server
Canonical Ltd

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: Why is package libpam-smbpass removed?

[Nish Aravamudan]

On 08.03.2016 [14:12:46 +0100], Linus Eklöf wrote:
> This breaks the easy set up for folder sharing in nautilus since only the
> guest access will work unless setting up samba manually.
> 
> Is this intended or should this feature be present and filed as a bug?

Looking at the src:samba package:
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/samba, it's still published for
Xenial.

Investigating the binary packages generated, though, you're right
libpam-smbpass is no longer generated.

Ah, the changelog
(https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/samba/+changelog) says:

2:4.1.20+dfsg-1ubuntu4
Superseded in xenial-proposed on 2015-12-16
samba (2:4.1.20+dfsg-1ubuntu4) xenial; urgency=medium

  * Backport Debian change to remove libpam-smbpasswd, it segfaults
leading to non working session (lp: #1515207)

 -- Sebastien Bacher <...>  Wed, 16 Dec 2015 11:47:44 +0100

That bug is:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/samba/+bug/1515207 and c#1
there indicates Debian has also removed this package.

-Nish


-- 
Nishanth Aravamudan
Ubuntu Server
Canonical Ltd

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss