Re: linux kernel version 5.15.0-69

[Oliver Grawert]

hi,
Am Samstag, dem 01.04.2023 um 12:47 +0200 schrieb
harald.font...@gmx.net:

> Do you recommend upgrading the kernel manually?

it does not ask you to "upgrade the kernel manually" it just tells you
that the upgrade happened but the kernel will only be able to be used
after a reboot of the machine ... so just do a reboot and be done ;)

ciao
oli


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- 
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

linux kernel version 5.15.0-69

[harald.fontius]

Dear all, 

 

I am new to managing servers – I “rented” a Linux Server from IONOS that I
have to manage it myself. 

 

While installing some packages I got this warning:



 

I ran “sudo apt-get dist-upgrade” but it didn’t do any upgrades. I am on
Ubuntu 22.04.2 LTS and extended security upgrades are enabled. Do you
recommend upgrading the kernel manually?

 

Kind Regards / Mit freundlichen Grüßen

 

Harald Fontius

Böhmerwaldstr. 11

D-71263 Weil der Stadt

015750766185

 

-- 
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-hardening] Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Thu, 15 Jun 2017 13:52:04 -0700, Brendan || Lyn Perrine wrote:
>On Thu, 15 Jun 2017 16:17:53 + aconcernedfoss...@airmail.cc wrote:
>> Oh exaulted one, I am so sorry to have wasted your inbox space.
>> You see we all live for you, exalted aryan queen!

Hi,

should we tolerate the above tone of voice from an anonymous disposable
email account? We all make mistakes, but we are using our real names
and/or identifiable email accounts.

>I personally care about gpl enforcement but am a bit too broke right
>now to donate money and do not possess the social skills to be in a
>courtroom nor do I personally have any code in the linux kernel. 

It's not my domain, but seemingly Ubuntu provides AppArmor and no
GRSecurity at all. However, the problem with this person aren't the
concerns. It's the tone of voice and that there isn't an evidence for a
violation.

Regards,
Ralf

-- 
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-hardening] Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

[Brendan || Lyn Perrine]

On Thu, 15 Jun 2017 16:17:53 +
aconcernedfoss...@airmail.cc wrote:

> Oh exaulted one, I am so sorry to have wasted your inbox space.
> You see we all live for you, exalted aryan queen!
> 
> Some of us care about the legal aspects of "copyleft".
> Without enforcement there is no reason for anyone to contribute to 
> linux.
> There is a simple trade: we trade our labor for your labor.
> 
> 
> On 2017-06-15 16:05, J wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 11:58 AM, W Stacy Lockwood 
> >  wrote:
> >> Did you not see Liam's reply, or do you just want to add nothing but 
> >> noise
> >> to this list?
> > 
> > Given the repeated spamming the list, the cross posting, and replying
> > on this list to response external to this list (oh the joys of
> > crossposting), can we just chuck this account into a moderation bin
> > and let him/her rant into a bit bucket?
> > 
> > I'm on both the Ubuntu lists, so I'm getting these double... yes, I
> > can filter this myself, but that doesn't help the larger group...
> > 
> >> On Jun 15, 2017 10:51,  wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> It's an obvious blatant violation. He is not allowed to add 
> >>> additional
> >>> terms, but being a "clever" programmer it seems that he has decided 
> >>> that
> >>> because the additional term that he (and seemingly PaxTeam) has 
> >>> imposed is
> >>> not written within the four corners of license grant document but 
> >>> instead is
> >>> communicated in some other way that """""doesn't make it an 
> >>> additional
> >>> term""""" and he has """"cleverly circumvented the linux copyright
> >>> terms"""", which obviously is not the case but other random 
> >>> programmers will
> >>> argue and swear it's fine till hell freezes over and get very angry 
> >>> when
> >>> someone with a legal background informs them otherwise.
> >>> 
> >>> I think many people are not aware of the violation because it's only 
> >>> been
> >>> a month since GRSecurity pulled the sourcecode: it was almost a moot 
> >>> point
> >>> before then with no real damage. Such is no-longer the case.
> >>> 
> >>> On 2017-06-15 15:43, Greg KH wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>> On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 03:34:06PM +, 
> >>>> aconcernedfoss...@airmail.cc
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly
> >>>>> violating
> >>>>> the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?
> >>>>> He is also violating the license grant, Courts would not be fooled 
> >>>>> by
> >>>>> his
> >>>>> scheme to prevent redistribution.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> The license grant the Linux Kernel is distributed under disallows 
> >>>>> the
> >>>>> imposition of additional terms. The making of an understanding that 
> >>>>> the
> >>>>> derivative work must not be redistributed (lest there be 
> >>>>> retaliation) is
> >>>>> the
> >>>>> imposition of an additional term. The communication of this threat 
> >>>>> is
> >>>>> the
> >>>>> moment that GRSecurity violates the license grant. Thence-forth
> >>>>> modification, making of derivative works, and distribution of such 
> >>>>> is a
> >>>>> violation of the Copyright statute. The concoction of the 
> >>>>> transparent
> >>>>> scheme
> >>>>> shows that it is a willful violation, one taken in full knowledge 
> >>>>> by
> >>>>> GRSecurity of the intention of the original grantor.
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> If you feel that what they are doing is somehow violating your 
> >>>> copyright
> >>>> on the Linux kernel, then you have the right to take legal action if 
> >>>> you
> >>>> so desire.  To tell others what to do, however, is not something 
> >>>> that
> >>>> usually gets you very far in the world.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Best of luck!
> >>>>

Re: [kernel-hardening] Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

[aconcernedfossdev]

I'm listening to your responses, and responding myself.

You call me a spammer.

Which is a libel.

Would you like me to file over it?

On 2017-06-15 16:05, Wade Smart wrote:

Whoever this person is, not only is s/he spamming multiple lists here,
there are several over lists where Im getting the same emails but
from a different address. Clearly not listing to any responses, just
a spammer with an agenda.


--
Registered Linux User: #480675
Registered Linux Machine: #408606
Linux since June 2005


--
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-hardening] Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

[aconcernedfossdev]

Nice vally-girl yawn.

Because you are not interested in legal matters vis a vis GRSecurity, no 
one should be and the discussion should be censored


You're a real piece of work, you know.
A real piece of work.

So I ask the question again: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of 
GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to 
the Linux Kernel?


Why does no one care that Brad Spengler (seemingly aswell as PaxTeam) of 
GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to 
the Linux Kernel?


Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly 
violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?
He is also violating the license grant, Courts would not be fooled by 
his scheme to prevent redistribution.


The license grant the Linux Kernel is distributed under disallows the 
imposition of additional terms. The making of an understanding that the 
derivative work must not be redistributed (lest there be retaliation) is 
the imposition of an additional term. The communication of this threat 
is the moment that GRSecurity violates the license grant. Thence-forth 
modification, making of derivative works, and distribution of such is a 
violation of the Copyright statute. The concoction of the transparent 
scheme shows that it is a willful violation, one taken in full knowledge 
by GRSecurity of the intention of the original grantor.



Why does not one person here care?
Just want to forget what holds Libre Software together and go the way of 
BSD?



(Note: last month the GRSecurity Team removed the public testing patch,
they prevent the distribution of the patch by paying customers by a
threat of no further business: they have concocted a transparent scheme
to make sure the intention of the Linux rights-holders (thousands of
entities) are defeated) (This is unlike RedHat who do distribute their
patches in the form the rights-holders prefer: source code, RedHat does
not attempt to stymie the redistribution of their derivative works,
GRSecurity does.).

--
( This song is about GRSecurity's violation of Linus et al's 
copyright**:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYnhI3wUej8
(A Boat Sails Away 2016 17) )

On 2017-06-15 16:05, J wrote:
On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 11:58 AM, W Stacy Lockwood 
 wrote:
Did you not see Liam's reply, or do you just want to add nothing but 
noise

to this list?


Given the repeated spamming the list, the cross posting, and replying
on this list to response external to this list (oh the joys of
crossposting), can we just chuck this account into a moderation bin
and let him/her rant into a bit bucket?

I'm on both the Ubuntu lists, so I'm getting these double... yes, I
can filter this myself, but that doesn't help the larger group...


On Jun 15, 2017 10:51,  wrote:


It's an obvious blatant violation. He is not allowed to add 
additional
terms, but being a "clever" programmer it seems that he has decided 
that
because the additional term that he (and seemingly PaxTeam) has 
imposed is
not written within the four corners of license grant document but 
instead is
communicated in some other way that """""doesn't make it an 
additional

term""""" and he has """"cleverly circumvented the linux copyright
terms"""", which obviously is not the case but other random 
programmers will
argue and swear it's fine till hell freezes over and get very angry 
when

someone with a legal background informs them otherwise.

I think many people are not aware of the violation because it's only 
been
a month since GRSecurity pulled the sourcecode: it was almost a moot 
point

before then with no real damage. Such is no-longer the case.

On 2017-06-15 15:43, Greg KH wrote:


On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 03:34:06PM +, 
aconcernedfoss...@airmail.cc

wrote:


Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly
violating
the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?
He is also violating the license grant, Courts would not be fooled 
by

his
scheme to prevent redistribution.

The license grant the Linux Kernel is distributed under disallows 
the
imposition of additional terms. The making of an understanding that 
the
derivative work must not be redistributed (lest there be 
retaliation) is

the
imposition of an additional term. The communication of this threat 
is

the
moment that GRSecurity violates the license grant. Thence-forth
modification, making of derivative works, and distribution of such 
is a
violation of the Copyright statute. The concoction of the 
transparent

scheme
shows that it is a willful violation, one taken in full knowledge 
by

GRSecurity of the intention of the original grantor.



If you feel that what they are doing is somehow violating your 
copyright
on the Linux kernel, then you have the right to take legal action if 
you
so desire.  To tell 

Re: [kernel-hardening] Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

[aconcernedfossdev]

Oh exaulted one, I am so sorry to have wasted your inbox space.
You see we all live for you, exalted aryan queen!

Some of us care about the legal aspects of "copyleft".
Without enforcement there is no reason for anyone to contribute to 
linux.

There is a simple trade: we trade our labor for your labor.


On 2017-06-15 16:05, J wrote:
On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 11:58 AM, W Stacy Lockwood 
 wrote:
Did you not see Liam's reply, or do you just want to add nothing but 
noise

to this list?


Given the repeated spamming the list, the cross posting, and replying
on this list to response external to this list (oh the joys of
crossposting), can we just chuck this account into a moderation bin
and let him/her rant into a bit bucket?

I'm on both the Ubuntu lists, so I'm getting these double... yes, I
can filter this myself, but that doesn't help the larger group...


On Jun 15, 2017 10:51,  wrote:


It's an obvious blatant violation. He is not allowed to add 
additional
terms, but being a "clever" programmer it seems that he has decided 
that
because the additional term that he (and seemingly PaxTeam) has 
imposed is
not written within the four corners of license grant document but 
instead is
communicated in some other way that """""doesn't make it an 
additional

term""""" and he has """"cleverly circumvented the linux copyright
terms"""", which obviously is not the case but other random 
programmers will
argue and swear it's fine till hell freezes over and get very angry 
when

someone with a legal background informs them otherwise.

I think many people are not aware of the violation because it's only 
been
a month since GRSecurity pulled the sourcecode: it was almost a moot 
point

before then with no real damage. Such is no-longer the case.

On 2017-06-15 15:43, Greg KH wrote:


On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 03:34:06PM +, 
aconcernedfoss...@airmail.cc

wrote:


Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly
violating
the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?
He is also violating the license grant, Courts would not be fooled 
by

his
scheme to prevent redistribution.

The license grant the Linux Kernel is distributed under disallows 
the
imposition of additional terms. The making of an understanding that 
the
derivative work must not be redistributed (lest there be 
retaliation) is

the
imposition of an additional term. The communication of this threat 
is

the
moment that GRSecurity violates the license grant. Thence-forth
modification, making of derivative works, and distribution of such 
is a
violation of the Copyright statute. The concoction of the 
transparent

scheme
shows that it is a willful violation, one taken in full knowledge 
by

GRSecurity of the intention of the original grantor.



If you feel that what they are doing is somehow violating your 
copyright
on the Linux kernel, then you have the right to take legal action if 
you
so desire.  To tell others what to do, however, is not something 
that

usually gets you very far in the world.

Best of luck!

greg k-h



--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-us...@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users



--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-us...@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users



--
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-hardening] Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

[aconcernedfossdev]

their customer restriction "you can redistribute

this code, but if you do we will on longer provide you
with updates" does not change that.

That is the imposition of an additional term, a court would not be 
amused by the programmers claim it's fine because he didn't ink it into 
the copy of the license he distributed the code with. The court would 
not be blind to the effect and the intention. The law has dealt with 
transparent schemes like this for hundreds of years, and within 
copyright for about a century (but much longer within contract law).


There should be a joint action.

On 2017-06-15 15:58, Rik van Riel wrote:

On Thu, 2017-06-15 at 15:34 +, aconcernedfoss...@airmail.cc wrote:

Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly 
violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?
He is also violating the license grant, Courts would not be fooled
by his scheme to prevent redistribution.


Right now there are a few million systems that use
grsecurity, and over a billion systems that are not
protected by grsecurity functionality.

Removing grsecurity from the community has been an
impetus to finally get the grsecurity functionality
into the upstream kernel, where it can benefit the
billion systems that do not have it today.


Why does not one person here care?
Just want to forget what holds Libre Software together and go the way
of BSD?


What holds Linux together is community. The license
is one of many aspects to that community, but far
from the only one.

GRSecurity has been outside of the community for years,
and their customer restriction "you can redistribute
this code, but if you do we will on longer provide you
with updates" does not change that.

Having the remaining developers who are interested in
hardening work on getting more functionality upstream,
now that the grsecurity patches are no longer available
to non-customers, is likely a good thing for everybody.

Want to help out?  Join us in ##linux-hardening on
irc.freenode.net.

kind regards,

Rik van Riel


--
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-hardening] Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

[aconcernedfossdev]

If Mr Spengler would like to market a non-re-distributable hardened 
kernel, he can write his own kernel from scratch. Currently he is 
marketing a non-redistributable derivative work of the Linux Kernel. He 
prevents customers of his from redistributing the derivative work by 
threatening a non-renewal of whatever contract exists between his 
company and the customers. This scheme has been successful. That is 
certainly the imposition of an additional term, which the Linux 
licensing terms forbid, when he imposed that additional term on his 
clients he violated the licensing terms and has no right to even modify 
the linux kernel from that point forward.


On 2017-06-15 15:53, Casey Schaufler wrote:

On 6/15/2017 8:34 AM, aconcernedfoss...@airmail.cc wrote:
Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly 
violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?
He is also violating the license grant, Courts would not be fooled by 
his scheme to prevent redistribution.


The license grant the Linux Kernel is distributed under disallows the 
imposition of additional terms. The making of an understanding that 
the derivative work must not be redistributed (lest there be 
retaliation) is the imposition of an additional term. The 
communication of this threat is the moment that GRSecurity violates 
the license grant. Thence-forth modification, making of derivative 
works, and distribution of such is a violation of the Copyright 
statute. The concoction of the transparent scheme shows that it is a 
willful violation, one taken in full knowledge by GRSecurity of the 
intention of the original grantor.



Why does not one person here care?


Email lists are never* the correct mechanism for the resolution
of legal issues. If someone from these email lists is working
to address a legal issue you are extremely unlikely to see any
evidence of it on an email list.


---
* I am not a lawyer. Do not construe this as legal advice.

Just want to forget what holds Libre Software together and go the way 
of BSD?



(Note: last month the GRSecurity Team removed the public testing 
patch,

they prevent the distribution of the patch by paying customers by a
threat of no further business: they have concocted a transparent 
scheme

to make sure the intention of the Linux rights-holders (thousands of
entities) are defeated) (This is unlike RedHat who do distribute their
patches in the form the rights-holders prefer: source code, RedHat 
does

not attempt to stymie the redistribution of their derivative works,
GRSecurity does.).

--
( This song is about GRSecurity's violation of Linus et al's 
copyright**:

youtube.com/watch?v=CYnhI3wUej8
(A Boat Sails Away 2016 17) )



--
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-hardening] Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

[aconcernedfossdev]

Also Brad Spengler has been threatening legal action against an openwall 
developer back-porting features of Brad's wholly, non-standalone, 
derivative work.



He also calls GRSecurity an "Original Work", which it is not (see the 
Anime Subs cases for the court's opinion) (GRSecurity is such a 
non-standalone derivative work, so the Linux Licensing terms absolutely 
do apply (it's a patch that snakes through the whole of the Linux Kernel 
source tree, touching everything like a vine).


Here's a quick rundown:
-

GRSecurity goes full commercial, no more free testing patches, threatens 
programmer trying to port.


(*1) https://lwn.net/Articles/723169/
(*2) 
https://www.phoronix.com/forums/forum/software/general-linux-open-source/948623-grsecurity-kernel-patches-will-no-longer-be-free-to-the-public?page=1
(*3) 
https://www.embedded-linux.de/18-news/886-grsecurity-nicht-mehr-kostenlos-verfuegbar
(*4) 
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/04/26/grsecurity_linux_kernel_freeloaders/


GRSecurity removes public testing patch - goes full commercial.

(*5) http://www.openwall.com/lists/kernel-hardening/2017/06/04/24

"Don't worry about it, there's nothing for a "grateful" user like 
yourself

to download anymore.  Boy, if I had more "grateful" users like yourself
obsessed with harrassing us on Twitter, Reddit, and IRC so that they
can go around and paint themselves as some kind of victim, I wouldn't
know what to do with myself.

-Brad"



Brad Spengler prevents a private purchaser from redistributing the 
sourcecode via contract clauses between him and they: thus willfully 
frustrating the purpose of the license HE was granted by the linux 
kernel rightsholders. This is another reason a court may find him in 
violation of the license grant of the GPL. As we discussed previously. 
(See: )


Also Brad Spengler threatens others with lawsuit in a nearly transparent 
attempt to get them to stop porting over the work:



" This stops *now* or I'm sending lawyers after you and


(*6) http://www.openwall.com/lists/kernel-hardening/2017/06/03/14

Guys, this is your *last warning*.  This stops *now* or I'm sending 
lawyers
after you and the companies paying you to plagiarize our work and 
violate
our *registered* copyright (which for the record entitles us to 
punitive

damages which now are very easily provable).  It's time to get serious
about attribution -- what you are doing is completely unacceptable.  
I'm
already in contact with lawyers to prepare for the next time this 
happens.

If any of this plagiarized and misattributed code actually made it into
the Linux kernel, you'd all be in a world of pain.


Here Brad Spengler threatens a copyright infringement lawsuit regarding 
his non-original wholly-derivative work.
(An original work stands alone). This while he threatens those paying 
customers who might redistribute the work (see:  below).




Note: Copyright licenses (like any license to use the property of 
another (copyright is freely alienable in the same way real property 
is)) are freely revocable unless barred by estoppel. The GPL v2 lacks a 
no-revocation clause thus estoppel would be more difficult to argue 
(additonally none of the "agreeing parties" have ever met each other).


Note2: GrSecurity is a derivative work of the linux kernel, it is 
non-seperable: it wholly relies on the linux kernel source code to work.
Courts in both the US and Germany have reaffirmed that if a work based 
on another work cannot stand alone it is clearly a derivative work.
(See the Anime Subtitles case from a few years ago) (See page 6 of the 
phoronix discussion at *2 for a review)


Note3:The linux kernel is not under joint copyright, it is simply a 
collection of derivative work upon derivative work.


A simple solution is for one or many of the rightsholders to the code 
GRSecurity is derived from/ modifies to rescind Brad Spengler's license 
to use or modify their code.


Additionally copyright violation claims can be filed as Brad Spengler 
has reportedly attempted to frustrate the purpose of the agreement that 
allows him to modify the linux kernel in the first place; placing 
additional restrictions to prevent redistribution of the sourcecode (a 
court would not be fooled by such a scheme).


(Addionally there were third parties who contributed to the GRSecurity 
code base when it was publically distributed.)



Other snippets from (*5) include Mr Spengler's unhappiness with the 
publication of his scheme and RMS's opinion of it:
... It has been nearly 4 months now and despite repeated follow-ups, I 
still

haven't received anything back more than an automated reply. Likewise
regarding some supposed claims by RMS which were published last year by
internet troll mikeeusa -- I have been trying since June 3rd of last
year to get any response

Re: [kernel-hardening] Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

[aconcernedfossdev]

It's an obvious blatant violation. He is not allowed to add additional 
terms, but being a "clever" programmer it seems that he has decided that 
because the additional term that he (and seemingly PaxTeam) has imposed 
is not written within the four corners of license grant document but 
instead is communicated in some other way that """""doesn't make it an 
additional term""""" and he has """"cleverly circumvented the linux 
copyright terms"""", which obviously is not the case but other random 
programmers will argue and swear it's fine till hell freezes over and 
get very angry when someone with a legal background informs them 
otherwise.


I think many people are not aware of the violation because it's only 
been a month since GRSecurity pulled the sourcecode: it was almost a 
moot point before then with no real damage. Such is no-longer the case.


On 2017-06-15 15:43, Greg KH wrote:
On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 03:34:06PM +, aconcernedfoss...@airmail.cc 
wrote:
Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly 
violating

the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?
He is also violating the license grant, Courts would not be fooled by 
his

scheme to prevent redistribution.

The license grant the Linux Kernel is distributed under disallows the
imposition of additional terms. The making of an understanding that 
the
derivative work must not be redistributed (lest there be retaliation) 
is the
imposition of an additional term. The communication of this threat is 
the

moment that GRSecurity violates the license grant. Thence-forth
modification, making of derivative works, and distribution of such is 
a
violation of the Copyright statute. The concoction of the transparent 
scheme

shows that it is a willful violation, one taken in full knowledge by
GRSecurity of the intention of the original grantor.


If you feel that what they are doing is somehow violating your 
copyright
on the Linux kernel, then you have the right to take legal action if 
you

so desire.  To tell others what to do, however, is not something that
usually gets you very far in the world.

Best of luck!

greg k-h


--
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

Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

[aconcernedfossdev]

Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly 
violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?
He is also violating the license grant, Courts would not be fooled by 
his scheme to prevent redistribution.


The license grant the Linux Kernel is distributed under disallows the 
imposition of additional terms. The making of an understanding that the 
derivative work must not be redistributed (lest there be retaliation) is 
the imposition of an additional term. The communication of this threat 
is the moment that GRSecurity violates the license grant. Thence-forth 
modification, making of derivative works, and distribution of such is a 
violation of the Copyright statute. The concoction of the transparent 
scheme shows that it is a willful violation, one taken in full knowledge 
by GRSecurity of the intention of the original grantor.



Why does not one person here care?
Just want to forget what holds Libre Software together and go the way of 
BSD?



(Note: last month the GRSecurity Team removed the public testing patch,
they prevent the distribution of the patch by paying customers by a
threat of no further business: they have concocted a transparent scheme
to make sure the intention of the Linux rights-holders (thousands of
entities) are defeated) (This is unlike RedHat who do distribute their
patches in the form the rights-holders prefer: source code, RedHat does
not attempt to stymie the redistribution of their derivative works,
GRSecurity does.).

--
( This song is about GRSecurity's violation of Linus et al's 
copyright**:

youtube.com/watch?v=CYnhI3wUej8
(A Boat Sails Away 2016 17) )

--
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

ABI changes analysis for the Linux kernel

[Ponomarenko Andrey]

Hello,

This is a tracker of ABI changes in the new upstream releases of the Linux 
kernel (defconfig, x86_64): https://abi-laboratory.pro/tracker/timeline/linux/

The tracker performs backward binary compatibility analysis of all public 
exported symbols and data types (declared in the ".ksymtab" and  ".ksymtab_gpl" 
sections of the vmlinux binary + system calls) and lists all added/removed 
symbols.

The source code of the tool is published on github: 
https://github.com/lvc/kernel-abi-tracker

The tool can be used to analyze downstream kernels as well. See README of the 
project. It's better to use ABICC 2.0 Beta or newer to improve performance of 
the analysis.

Enjoy!

-- 
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: bcmwl-kernel-source and linux kernel 4.7

[Javad Karabi]

it looks like IEEE80211_BAND_2GHZ/IEEE80211_BAND_5GHZ, has been renamed
to NL80211_BAND_2GHZ/NL80211_BAND_5GHZ

i have tested the below patch on my machine, and i am able to successfully
build, and use, my wireless adapter with it



diff --git a/src/wl/sys/wl_cfg80211_hybrid.c
b/src/wl/sys/wl_cfg80211_hybrid.c
index de0cc4b..b58268c 100644
--- a/src/wl/sys/wl_cfg80211_hybrid.c
+++ b/src/wl/sys/wl_cfg80211_hybrid.c
@@ -234,7 +234,7 @@ static s8 wl_dbg_estr[][WL_DBG_ESTR_MAX] = {
 #endif

 #define CHAN2G(_channel, _freq, _flags) { \
- .band = IEEE80211_BAND_2GHZ, \
+ .band = NL80211_BAND_2GHZ, \
  .center_freq = (_freq), \
  .hw_value = (_channel), \
  .flags = (_flags), \
@@ -243,7 +243,7 @@ static s8 wl_dbg_estr[][WL_DBG_ESTR_MAX] = {
 }

 #define CHAN5G(_channel, _flags) { \
- .band = IEEE80211_BAND_5GHZ, \
+ .band = NL80211_BAND_5GHZ, \
  .center_freq = 5000 + (5 * (_channel)), \
  .hw_value = (_channel), \
  .flags = (_flags), \
@@ -377,7 +377,7 @@ static struct ieee80211_channel __wl_5ghz_n_channels[]
= {
 };

 static struct ieee80211_supported_band __wl_band_2ghz = {
- .band = IEEE80211_BAND_2GHZ,
+ .band = NL80211_BAND_2GHZ,
  .channels = __wl_2ghz_channels,
  .n_channels = ARRAY_SIZE(__wl_2ghz_channels),
  .bitrates = wl_g_rates,
@@ -385,7 +385,7 @@ static struct ieee80211_supported_band __wl_band_2ghz =
{
 };

 static struct ieee80211_supported_band __wl_band_5ghz_a = {
- .band = IEEE80211_BAND_5GHZ,
+ .band = NL80211_BAND_5GHZ,
  .channels = __wl_5ghz_a_channels,
  .n_channels = ARRAY_SIZE(__wl_5ghz_a_channels),
  .bitrates = wl_a_rates,
@@ -393,7 +393,7 @@ static struct ieee80211_supported_band __wl_band_5ghz_a
= {
 };

 static struct ieee80211_supported_band __wl_band_5ghz_n = {
- .band = IEEE80211_BAND_5GHZ,
+ .band = NL80211_BAND_5GHZ,
  .channels = __wl_5ghz_n_channels,
  .n_channels = ARRAY_SIZE(__wl_5ghz_n_channels),
  .bitrates = wl_a_rates,
@@ -1874,8 +1874,8 @@ static s32 wl_alloc_wdev(struct device *dev, struct
wireless_dev **rwdev)
  wdev->wiphy->max_num_pmkids = WL_NUM_PMKIDS_MAX;
 #endif
  wdev->wiphy->interface_modes = BIT(NL80211_IFTYPE_STATION) |
BIT(NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC);
- wdev->wiphy->bands[IEEE80211_BAND_2GHZ] = &__wl_band_2ghz;
- wdev->wiphy->bands[IEEE80211_BAND_5GHZ] = &__wl_band_5ghz_a;
+ wdev->wiphy->bands[NL80211_BAND_2GHZ] = &__wl_band_2ghz;
+ wdev->wiphy->bands[NL80211_BAND_5GHZ] = &__wl_band_5ghz_a;
  wdev->wiphy->signal_type = CFG80211_SIGNAL_TYPE_MBM;
  wdev->wiphy->cipher_suites = __wl_cipher_suites;
  wdev->wiphy->n_cipher_suites = ARRAY_SIZE(__wl_cipher_suites);
@@ -1998,7 +1998,7 @@ static s32 wl_inform_single_bss(struct
wl_cfg80211_priv *wl, struct wl_bss_info
 #if LINUX_VERSION_CODE >= KERNEL_VERSION(2, 6, 39)
  freq = ieee80211_channel_to_frequency(notif_bss_info->channel,
  (notif_bss_info->channel <= CH_MAX_2G_CHANNEL) ?
- IEEE80211_BAND_2GHZ : IEEE80211_BAND_5GHZ);
+ NL80211_BAND_2GHZ : NL80211_BAND_5GHZ);
 #else
  freq = ieee80211_channel_to_frequency(notif_bss_info->channel);
 #endif
@@ -2112,7 +2112,7 @@ wl_notify_connect_status(struct wl_cfg80211_priv *wl,
struct net_device *ndev,

  freq = ieee80211_channel_to_frequency(bss_info_channel,
  (bss_info_channel <= CH_MAX_2G_CHANNEL) ?
- IEEE80211_BAND_2GHZ : IEEE80211_BAND_5GHZ);
+ NL80211_BAND_2GHZ : NL80211_BAND_5GHZ);

  channel = ieee80211_get_channel(wl_to_wiphy(wl), freq);
  cfg80211_ibss_joined(ndev, (u8 *)&wl->bssid, channel, GFP_KERNEL);
@@ -2247,10 +2247,10 @@ static void wl_ch_to_chanspec(struct
ieee80211_channel *chan, struct wl_join_par
  join_params->params.chanspec_list[0] =
 ieee80211_frequency_to_channel(chan->center_freq);

- if (chan->band == IEEE80211_BAND_2GHZ) {
+ if (chan->band == NL80211_BAND_2GHZ) {
  chanspec |= WL_CHANSPEC_BAND_2G;
  }
- else if (chan->band == IEEE80211_BAND_5GHZ) {
+ else if (chan->band == NL80211_BAND_5GHZ) {
  chanspec |= WL_CHANSPEC_BAND_5G;
  }
  else {
@@ -2876,7 +2876,7 @@ static s32 wl_update_wiphybands(struct
wl_cfg80211_priv *wl)

  if (phy == 'n' || phy == 'a' || phy == 'v') {
  wiphy = wl_to_wiphy(wl);
- wiphy->bands[IEEE80211_BAND_5GHZ] = &__wl_band_5ghz_n;
+ wiphy->bands[NL80211_BAND_5GHZ] = &__wl_band_5ghz_n;
  }

  return err;
-- 
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: GRSecurity Closes Stable Patch of Linux Kernel, Your opinion?

[Ralf Mardorf]

Hi,

there were already discussions about violations of the GPL on Linux
audio lists, but I have forgotten if it's allowed to provide the source
to customers only. IMO it doesn't matter what's allowed and what isn't
allowed, there's an ethical commitment to keep source code open. Another
issue is that companies might be unfair, common sense for civilised
societies is, that if somebody is unfair or criminal, this still isn't
a reason to become unfair or criminal too. It's not a daisy chain,
"somebody has stolen my toy, so I'll steal the toys of other children",
kindergarten teacher don't allow such a behaviour.

"The test series, unfit in our view for production use, will however
continue to be available to the public to avoid impact to the Gentoo
Hardened and Arch Linux communities."

In other words, the Linux community is still good enough to provide the
base code and unpaid testers.

However, I'm not surprised, social intercourse affecting refugees
becomes more and more uncivilised with every hour, so I don't expect
that intellectual property will be shared in a civilised manner.
Humanes are degenerated, at least uncivilised, if they care more about a
killed lion, than about other humans and sharing unexceptional
everything.

2 Cents,
Ralf

PS: I'm an Arch Linux user, but there's no mailing list for such
discussions. I also doubt that this list is the right place to discus
it. One list for such discussions is
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic.

-- 
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

GRSecurity Closes Stable Patch of Linux Kernel, Your opinion?

[Veri Vel]

Go to grsecurity.org, look on the side panel where it lists the versions, you 
see:

Stable (Restricted): 3.1-3.2.71 Last updated: 09/13/15
Stable (Restricted): 3.1-3.14.52 Last updated: 09/13/15
Test (Free): 3.1-4.1.7 Last updated: 09/13/15 

What does this mean? It means the stable source patches, which are wholely 
derivative works of the linux kernel, have been brought closed. This is how to 
"un-GPL" a work, 101. That is what has happened, effectivly: they got around 
your intent that derivative works be open, like the linux kernel, except this 
time they are not even distributing source (like RedHat does) but not the 
binaries, the source itself is restricted. What do these stable patches consist 
of? It is a diff
that is created by linux kernel + grsecurity changes to linux kernel + 
backports of security
patches to the linux kernel. 200 dollars a month if you want it. They're using 
your security patches,
and have closed the source of the finished "product" to all the world.

GRSecurity Linux Kernel patch ends public accessability of stable patches. (The 
full rundown)

Grsecurity is a 4MB patch of the linux kernel. For 14 years now Brad Spengler 
and "PaxTeam" have released
to the public a patch to the kernel that prevents buffer overflows, adds 
address space protection, adds
Access Control List functions, prevents various other security related errors 
(the programs are terminated
rather than allowed to write to protected memory or execute other flaws), 
aswell as various improvements
shell servers might find useful such as allowing a user to only see his own 
processes (unless he is in
a special group), and tracking the ipaddress associated with a particular 
process.

Now Brad Spengler has announced that there will be no more public distribution 
of the stable GRSecurity
patch of the linux kernel.

Some supporters of GRSecurity have claimed that GRSecurity is not even a 
derivative work of the linux kernel
and that Spengler may do whatever he wishes, including closing to code to all 
except those who pay him 200
dollars per month. Detractors contend that GRSecurity is a derivative work, and 
have noted that it is not likely that the thousands of linux code contributors 
intended that derivative works be closed in this manner. Detractors have also 
noted the differences between copyright grants and alienations based on 
property law and those based on contract law, and that the linux kernel is 
likely "licensed" under contract law and not "licensed" under property law (to 
use the term loosely), and that this has implications regarding the relevancy 
of the intentions of the parties. Detractors have also noted that the agreement 
is not likely to be deemed fully integrated. Supporters of GRSecurity have then 
claimed that the linux kernel's license (GPLv2) is just a "bare license". 
Detractors then noted that licenses (creatures of property law) can be 
rescinded by the licensor at-will (barring estoppel), and in that case any 
contributor to the Linux Kernel code could rescind Brad Spengler's permission 
to create derivative works of their code at will, and that the GRSecurity 
Supporters should hope that Linux (and the GPL) is "licensed" under a contract 
and not a bare license.

The whole situation stems from WindRiver, a subsidiary on Intel(R), mentioning 
that they use GRSecurity in their product. Brad Spengler wished for WindRiver 
to pay him a 200 dollars per month fee. Spengler then threatened to sue Intel 
under copyright law and trademark law. He, at that time, claimed that Intel was 
"violating the GPL" (a claim that has now been rescinded) and his trademark on 
the word "GRSecurity" (a claim which still stands but is currently not being 
pursued in court). Intel threatened to ask for legal cost reimbursement if 
Spengler brought this to court (Judges often reward this for spurious baseless 
claims to discourage excessive litigation).

It has been noted that Brad Spengler's copyright claim is more-or-less 
non-existent, and his trademark claim is very weak and near non-existent (thus 
the threat for reimbursement of fees). In trademark law one is barred from, 
within a field of endeavor, conflating another persons trademark with ones own 
product one created. Here WindRiver (a subsidiary of Intel(R)) simply noted 
that it used the grsecurity patch in it's product: It did not create a brand 
new piece of code and call that "GRSecurity": It simply used what Spengler 
provided.

In retaliation, Spengler has announced he is closing the stable grsecurity 
patch to all but those who pay him 200 dollars per month. (And notes that any 
other branch is not fit for human consumption)

--

More can be found at: grsecurity.org and http://grsecurity.net/announce.php

The text of the announcement:
"Important Notice Regarding Public Availability of Stable Patch

Major Page Fault Handler in the Linux Kernel

[Alfred Zhong]

Hi Dear Ubuntu developers and kernel hackers,

I am wondering where is the major page fault handler.

I wrote an algorithm to minimize page faults in the kernel. So I need to
record something whenever a page fault happens. I currently record a page
fault happen at do_page_fault(...) in arch/x86/mm/fault_32.c

However, it seems both minor and major page fault will go to
do_page_fault(...) ...
And minor page faults happen all the time and messed up the algorithm.

I guess I only want to record stuff when a major page_fault happens. So,
kernel hackers, would you please tell me where should I put my code? Which
file and which function.


By the way, I am hacking kernel 2.6.24

Thank you very much!
Alfred
-- 
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: Linux Kernel

[Daniel Chen]

On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 5:05 AM, Volovikov Taras  wrote:
> Which version of the kernel you plan to include in Ubuntu 10.10?
> I believe that if you want to use btrfs, the better it will be 2.6.35 or
> later.

https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2010-May/030764.html

-- 
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

Linux Kernel

[Volovikov Taras]

Which version of the kernel you plan to include in Ubuntu 10.10?
I believe that if you want to use btrfs, the better it will be 2.6.35 or
later.


-- 
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: Linux kernel debug information missing from Intrepid

[Pär Andersson]

Hi,

On Friday 31 October 2008 21.55.39 Martin Pitt wrote:
> In Intrepid it is now marked as a "debug symbol" package and lands at
>
>   http://ddebs.ubuntu.com/pool/main/l/linux/

The packages is not installable using APT as they are missing from the ddebs 
repository Packages file. Also the meta-packages seems to be missing.

> However, I agree that you aren't the first one who complains about
> this, and it isn't all that obvious how to find it.
> 
> Maybe some kernel package should at least ship a README to explain how
> to find it?

I am probably one of the others you mention. I made a comment on some bug some 
time back, but due to work I have not had the time to follow up on this. :-(

The current state is that you have to use Google and find IRC logs to get any 
information at all about this change. For me this is a huge regression, I 
would have liked it to be mentioned in the release notes that kernel debugging 
is no longer supported.

That I say unsupported is because until now Ubuntu have actually been one of 
the distributions where this have had the best support. Everything have been 
available in the normal repository, and upgrades have worked thanks to the 
meta-packages.

Compare this with CentOS where you have to get the debuginfo from a separate 
FTP site after every kernel upgrade, or Debian where I don't think they are 
packaged at all. Fedora have them in a separate repository, but this is 
configured by default so you you just use yum --enablerepo=fedora-debuginfo.

Unless the ddebs repo is made as easy to use as Fedoras debuginfo I don't 
think the kernel debug stuff should move there, so for Intrepid please move 
them back. If you really need to move them then wait for Jaunty, make sure you 
document the change and handle upgrades for people that have them installed.

I think kernel debugging is special enough that it can have an exception and 
not been in ddebs with normal user space debug symbols. For some reasons why 
kernel debugging is special just look up some Solaris marketing about what 
DTrace can do. On Linux we have systemtap instead but it needs debug symbols 
to work. OProfile is another good example, it works for user space 
applications, but for diagnosing hardware issues you will need the kernel 
symbols.

A little of topic, but at work we are a CentOS shop. Two colleagues that have 
"upgraded" their laptops to Ubuntu have both mentioned how easy it was to get 
oprofile running.

I also read in the release notes for RHEL 5.3 beta yesterday that systemtap is 
mentioned. I find it sad to see Ubuntu going in the opposite direction.

This rant got a little longer than I intended, sorry about that, but I really 
think this is a big regression that should be corrected. 

Just don't think that I am only complaining. This (and one kmail bug) is the 
only real problem I have with Intrepid. I upgraded to some late alpha, and 
overall I think this is one of the best releases yet. :-)

Regards,

Pär Andersson



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-- 
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: Linux kernel debug information missing from Intrepid

[Martin Pitt]

Hi Stefano,

Stefano Doni [2008-10-29 20:27 +0100]:
>first of let me congratulate on the Intrepid release, you made a great
> work, as usual!

Thanks!
 
> I would like to bring to your attention though that Intrepid seems to lack
> the linux-image-debug package. This is needed in order to use the Systemtap
> utility.
> 
> I've filed a bug here:
> 
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/289087
> 
> This is a regression from Hardy, which actually have that package.

In Intrepid it is now marked as a "debug symbol" package and lands at

  http://ddebs.ubuntu.com/pool/main/l/linux/

However, I agree that you aren't the first one who complains about
this, and it isn't all that obvious how to find it.

Maybe some kernel package should at least ship a README to explain how
to find it?

Thanks,

Martin

-- 
Martin Pitt| http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com)  | Debian Developer  (www.debian.org)

-- 
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

Linux kernel debug information missing from Intrepid

[Stefano Doni]

Hello guys,
   first of let me congratulate on the Intrepid release, you made a great
work, as usual!

I would like to bring to your attention though that Intrepid seems to lack
the linux-image-debug package. This is needed in order to use the Systemtap
utility.

I've filed a bug here:

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/289087

This is a regression from Hardy, which actually have that package.

Thanks!
-- 
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: Upgrading Hardy Heron 8.04 Beta to Linux kernel .16 breaks it; it won't boot.

[(``-_-´´) -- Fernando]

Olá Jim.

On Wednesday 16 April 2008 13:53:28 Jim and Judi Harris wrote:
> Please also send a URL describing how to "change your grub boot options to
> remove the splash so you can see the errors etc. better", as I see no such
> help anywhere, including in the GRUB Manual at

> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > > Jim Harris

when you see the boot splash press ctrl+alt+F1.
Easiest way do that on a temporary base.

-- 
BUGabundo  :o)
(``-_-´´)   http://Ubuntu.BUGabundo.net
Linux user #443786GPG key 1024D/A1784EBB
My new micro-blog @ http://BUGabundo.net
ps. My emails tend to sound authority and aggressive. I'm sorry in advance. 
I'll try to be more assertive as time goes by...


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-- 
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: Upgrading Hardy Heron 8.04 Beta to Linux kernel .16 breaks it; it won't boot.

[Markus Hitter]

Am 16.04.2008 um 14:53 schrieb Jim and Judi Harris:

> ubuntu-users  -
> Ubuntu user technical support, not for general discussions
>
> and my Ubuntu is the free version so I am not under a "user technical
> support" agreement?

Your Ubuntu is free as well as the technical support through mailing  
lists. If you want to give something back, continue reading these  
lists and answer some of the postings your self.

> Further, don't you agree there should be at least one list where  
> users are
> encouraged to submit problem reports?

If you have a reproduceable misbehaviour, one of the first steps  
should be to file a bug. Improvement requests go there as well.  
Mailing lists are more for discussion, less for documentation (of the  
bug).

> I see no such recommendation.

Remember, Ubuntu is a project driven by thousands of people. While  
some of these people do nothing but to fill in descriptions, help and  
other texts, there are even more snippets missing. If you found such  
a spot of void, write down what belongs there and hand it over to the  
documentation team in form of a bug report.


That said, I think Ubuntu is now adult enough to move the emphasis  
slightly more towards stability. A single showstopper distracts more  
people than a dozen new features.


> See also (others have splash-related problems):

Great you found them. Add such links to your bug report, they will  
save developers to search them their selfs.


Markus

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dipl. Ing. Markus Hitter
http://www.jump-ing.de/





-- 
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: Upgrading Hardy Heron 8.04 Beta to Linux kernel .16 breaks it; it won't boot.

[Todd Deshane]

On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 8:53 AM, Jim and Judi Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

>
> Thanks to Todd and Henrik. No, Henrik, I don't have a TV card; there is
> nothing but a GeForce 2 video card added to the mobo.
>
> Todd, how can I run any of what you say if it won't boot? Do I do all that
> work on the older version? What about the startup/boot log that I presume is
> generated during the .16 boot?
>
> Please also send a URL describing how to "change your grub boot options to
> remove the splash so you can see the errors etc. better", as I see no such
> help anywhere, including in the GRUB Manual at
>
> http://www.gnu.org/software/grub/manual/grub.html
>

These should help:
http://www.foogazi.com/2007/10/27/remove-the-ubuntu-splash-screen/




>
> which I am starting to read ( 52 pages ! ) but guess what: A search of the
> complete text (HTML) for splash finds none, so I have come to a dead end
> trying to do what you say. Oh well, at least there is a Manual, and I guess
> I can send the GRUB team a request to fix the Manual to include how to
> "remove the splash" and any other explanation of controlling the splash,
> including how to prevent GRUB-update from undoing the changes a user (root?)
> makes (see refs below),
>
> and then, once I know what I want/need to change, should I use QGRUBEditor
> as in
>
>
> http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/columns/how_to_edit_your_grub_settings_with_qgrubeditor
>
> or just nano or gEdit, or something else?
>
> Do you see why a person like me who wants to help improve Linux and defeat
> the Evil Empire gets discouraged, because it's too d__ed difficult to learn
> how to run tools and report problems (even to find out which forum/list to
> post to)? If indeed "Requests and posts to this list should be more mature
> in nature and something that developers would or could act more directly
> on", then why is such guidance not on the page introducing the Ubuntu Lists
> at
>
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/
>
> which I did read carefully before deciding this list is the only one I
> could use, as I saw
>
> ubuntu-users  -
> Ubuntu user technical support, not for general discussions
>
> and my Ubuntu is the free version so I am not under a "user technical
> support" agreement?
>
> Further, don't you agree there should be at least one list where users are
> encouraged to submit problem reports? I see no such recommendation.
>


Well in ideal world yes there would be one place. The current state of the
world is that the developers are mostly volunteers and busy solving problems
that are more mature. They do their best to solve the most critical issues
first. I know that we all think that they should stop what they are doing
and solve our problem, but that would lead to chaos. Who has the most
important problem?

The process to get the most attention is to follow the proper procedures.
Obviously there are lots of users now of Ubuntu products, all with different
skills sets and backgrounds. So, it is difficult to know how much detail to
give to a particular request. The most research the user can do the better.
The different lists are setup so that people can expect help from those
lists as appropriate. A lot of users come to this list and ask inappropriate
questions (me included). People still try to do their best to answer them.

 I hope to not discourage you from asking questions and I appreciate your
research ahead of time to figure out what you should do.

I hope that the above instructions help you to find your problem in more
detail, search for existing bugs, and then report yours if it is not
reported already.

Best of luck,
Todd




>
> See also (others have splash-related problems):
>
> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=503913
>
>
> and some have analyzed it some, and have some more info:
>
> http://osdir.com/ml/boot-loaders.grub.bugs/2005-07/msg00027.html
>
> If you wish to address any of the above points of course I encourage that,
> but either way, I will take all this to the "users list" as you recommend.
>
> Thanks again for any help.
>
> Jim
>
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 1:25 PM, Todd Deshane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Hi Jim,
> >
> > This is something that I would recommend report a bug on at:
> >
> > https://launchpad.net/ubuntu
> >
> > From your description it sounds like it is a kernel problem, so look for
> > the appropriate linux package. Make sure you have the latest available and
> > then you should provide some more information in the reports.
> >
> > For some good ideas see: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingProcedures and
> > in particular: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeamBugPolicies
> >
> > Things to make sure you include are the output of dmesg, lspci, and the
> > like.
> >
> > You should also change your grub boot options to remove the splash so
> > you can see the errors etc. better.
> >
> > This type of problem is generally better for the users list or forums.
> > Requests and posts t

Re: Upgrading Hardy Heron 8.04 Beta to Linux kernel .16 breaks it; it won't boot.

[Jim and Judi Harris]

Thanks to Todd and Henrik. No, Henrik, I don't have a TV card; there is
nothing but a GeForce 2 video card added to the mobo.

Todd, how can I run any of what you say if it won't boot? Do I do all that
work on the older version? What about the startup/boot log that I presume is
generated during the .16 boot?

Please also send a URL describing how to "change your grub boot options to
remove the splash so you can see the errors etc. better", as I see no such
help anywhere, including in the GRUB Manual at

http://www.gnu.org/software/grub/manual/grub.html

which I am starting to read ( 52 pages ! ) but guess what: A search of the
complete text (HTML) for splash finds none, so I have come to a dead end
trying to do what you say. Oh well, at least there is a Manual, and I guess
I can send the GRUB team a request to fix the Manual to include how to
"remove the splash" and any other explanation of controlling the splash,
including how to prevent GRUB-update from undoing the changes a user (root?)
makes (see refs below),

and then, once I know what I want/need to change, should I use QGRUBEditor
as in

http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/columns/how_to_edit_your_grub_settings_with_qgrubeditor

or just nano or gEdit, or something else?

Do you see why a person like me who wants to help improve Linux and defeat
the Evil Empire gets discouraged, because it's too d__ed difficult to learn
how to run tools and report problems (even to find out which forum/list to
post to)? If indeed "Requests and posts to this list should be more mature
in nature and something that developers would or could act more directly
on", then why is such guidance not on the page introducing the Ubuntu Lists
at

https://lists.ubuntu.com/

which I did read carefully before deciding this list is the only one I could
use, as I saw

ubuntu-users  -
Ubuntu user technical support, not for general discussions

and my Ubuntu is the free version so I am not under a "user technical
support" agreement?

Further, don't you agree there should be at least one list where users are
encouraged to submit problem reports? I see no such recommendation.


See also (others have splash-related problems):

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=503913


and some have analyzed it some, and have some more info:

http://osdir.com/ml/boot-loaders.grub.bugs/2005-07/msg00027.html

If you wish to address any of the above points of course I encourage that,
but either way, I will take all this to the "users list" as you recommend.

Thanks again for any help.

Jim

On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 1:25 PM, Todd Deshane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hi Jim,
>
> This is something that I would recommend report a bug on at:
>
> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu
>
> From your description it sounds like it is a kernel problem, so look for
> the appropriate linux package. Make sure you have the latest available and
> then you should provide some more information in the reports.
>
> For some good ideas see: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingProcedures and
> in particular: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeamBugPolicies
>
> Things to make sure you include are the output of dmesg, lspci, and the
> like.
>
> You should also change your grub boot options to remove the splash so you
> can see the errors etc. better.
>
> This type of problem is generally better for the users list or forums.
> Requests and posts to this list should be more mature in nature and
> something that developers would or could act more directly on.
>
> Follow up questions would be better addressed by those lists as well
> (until the point at which it is a confirmed bug and there is a clear fix and
> something that should get developers attention, use your discretion on that
> one)
>
> Best Regards,
> Todd
>
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 2:01 PM, Jim and Judi Harris <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi. This is my first post to this kind of list. I'm not a Linux newbie
> > but close to it. I've been using Ubuntu for the last few years (and tried a
> > few other versions before that), but mostly as a "Typical Windows User",
> > where I focus mostly on using the applications, not the OS. Anyway, perhaps
> > because of that orientation, I have chosen Ubuntu and love it, and have
> > switched all my learning efforts to applications that Ubuntu supports, e.g.
> > Mythbuntu, StreamRipper, DVD authoring, OpenOffice (tho I'm getting real
> > disappointed in Writer compared to M$ Word), lots more.
> >
> > So here's my problem report: I burned a verified ISO of Hardy Beta a
> > couple weeks ago, and it installed flawlessly (after CD Check OK) on a new
> > hard drive in a 5-year-old box I own, and I was using it a little with no
> > problems on and off for a couple weeks, then last weekend it told me it had
> > a bunch of updates (about 150 MB or 150 packages; I'm not sure) and that
> > went flawlessly too, and I did some more stuff and shut down normally. Now,
> > when I power on, it app

Re: Upgrading Hardy Heron 8.04 Beta to Linux kernel .16 breaks it; it won't boot.

[Henrik Johansson]

Hi,

Do you have a TV card?

I have a TV card and i think this is why it fails. If you try to boot
one of the newer kernels 15 or 16 in recovery mode you may see some
hints about it being the TV card. I get a full stop right after some
messages about Hauppauge and modprobe exiting abnormally.

I do believe there is a bug filed already concerning this but i am not
sure of its status. 

I have to use kernel 14 to boot at all now which while it is not a
disaster its not really cool.

/ Hank


tis 2008-04-15 klockan 13:01 -0500 skrev Jim and Judi Harris:
> 
> Hi. This is my first post to this kind of list. I'm not a Linux newbie
> but close to it. I've been using Ubuntu for the last few years (and
> tried a few other versions before that), but mostly as a "Typical
> Windows User", where I focus mostly on using the applications, not the
> OS. Anyway, perhaps because of that orientation, I have chosen Ubuntu
> and love it, and have switched all my learning efforts to applications
> that Ubuntu supports, e.g. Mythbuntu, StreamRipper, DVD authoring,
> OpenOffice (tho I'm getting real disappointed in Writer compared to M$
> Word), lots more.
> 
> So here's my problem report: I burned a verified ISO of Hardy Beta a
> couple weeks ago, and it installed flawlessly (after CD Check OK) on a
> new hard drive in a 5-year-old box I own, and I was using it a little
> with no problems on and off for a couple weeks, then last weekend it
> told me it had a bunch of updates (about 150 MB or 150 packages; I'm
> not sure) and that went flawlwssly too, and I did some more stuff and
> shut down normally. Now, when I power on, it appears to boot OK up to
> where the little orange thingie stops shuttling back and forth, and
> becomes a normal "progress bar", then it goes about 3 jumps till it's
> about 15% done and then just sits there forever. So I power off and
> on, then choose the previous version from the GRUB menu (I think it's
> kernel .12 to boot OK, rather than the .16 that fails). I will be
> happy to send some startup logs or sys info or whatever would help,
> but I don't know how to get them. I can run Terminal and browse the
> Filesystem and Locate and install new tools via the Package Manager.
> So if you want me to run some command-line utility, maybe with sudo,
> please tell me exactly what to type and I will pipe the output to a
> file and send it to you or whatever will help.
> 
> In general, I would like to learn what troubleshooting/diagnostic
> tools I should use in a situation like this, so if you want to send me
> some URLs to those I will learn some more.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Jim Harris
> 
> -- 
> When sitting down in front of a computer to do
> something useful, never say, or even think,
> "I will just do this quickly."


-- 
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: Upgrading Hardy Heron 8.04 Beta to Linux kernel .16 breaks it; it won't boot.

[Juan C. Villa]

Hey Jim,

I believe that the error you are experiencing is a side effect of a fix that 
was comitted to workaround an issue the ALSA modules had. This fix was reverted 
soon thereafter. Have you attempted to boot under linux -12 kernel?

try:
 sudo apt-get update
 sudo apt-get upgrade

If that does not work for you then you might want to file a bug at 
http://launchpad.net

Regards,
-
Juan C. Villa
Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
Georgia Institute of Technology
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(404)441-9653
  _  

From: Jim and Judi Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Sent: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 12:01:20 -0600
Subject: Upgrading Hardy Heron 8.04 Beta to Linux kernel .16 breaks it; it 
won't boot.


Hi. This is my first post to this kind of list. I'm not a Linux newbie but 
close to it. I've been using Ubuntu for the last few years (and tried a few 
other versions before that), but mostly as a "Typical Windows User", where I 
focus mostly on using the applications, not the OS. Anyway, perhaps because of 
that orientation, I have chosen Ubuntu and love it, and have switched all my 
learning efforts to applications that Ubuntu supports, e.g. Mythbuntu, 
StreamRipper, DVD authoring, OpenOffice (tho I'm getting real disappointed in 
Writer compared to M$ Word), lots more.
  
So here's my problem report: I burned a verified ISO of Hardy Beta a couple 
weeks ago, and it installed flawlessly (after CD Check OK) on a new hard drive 
in a 5-year-old box I own, and I was using it a little with no problems on and 
off for a couple weeks, then last weekend it told me it had a bunch of updates 
(about 150 MB or 150 packages; I'm not sure) and that went flawlwssly too, and 
I did some more stuff and shut down normally. Now, when I power on, it appears 
to boot OK up to where the little orange thingie stops shuttling back and 
forth, and becomes a normal "progress bar", then it goes about 3 jumps till 
it's about 15% done and then just sits there forever. So I power off and on, 
then choose the previous version from the GRUB menu (I think it's kernel .12 to 
boot OK, rather than the .16 that fails). I will be happy to send some startup 
logs or sys info or whatever would help, but I don't know how to get them. I 
can run Terminal and browse the Filesystem and Locate and install new tools via 
the Package Manager. So if you want me to run some command-line utility, maybe 
with sudo, please tell me exactly what to type and I will pipe the output to a 
file and send it to you or whatever will help.
  
In general, I would like to learn what troubleshooting/diagnostic tools I 
should use in a situation like this, so if you want to send me some URLs to 
those I will learn some more.

Sincerely,

Jim Harris
  
-- 
When sitting down in front of a computer to do
something useful, never say, or even think,
"I will just do this quickly."-- 
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: Upgrading Hardy Heron 8.04 Beta to Linux kernel .16 breaks it; it won't boot.

[Todd Deshane]

Hi Jim,

This is something that I would recommend report a bug on at:

https://launchpad.net/ubuntu

>From your description it sounds like it is a kernel problem, so look for the
appropriate linux package. Make sure you have the latest available and then
you should provide some more information in the reports.

For some good ideas see: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingProcedures and in
particular: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeamBugPolicies

Things to make sure you include are the output of dmesg, lspci, and the
like.

You should also change your grub boot options to remove the splash so you
can see the errors etc. better.

This type of problem is generally better for the users list or forums.
Requests and posts to this list should be more mature in nature and
something that developers would or could act more directly on.

Follow up questions would be better addressed by those lists as well (until
the point at which it is a confirmed bug and there is a clear fix and
something that should get developers attention, use your discretion on that
one)

Best Regards,
Todd

On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 2:01 PM, Jim and Judi Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

>
> Hi. This is my first post to this kind of list. I'm not a Linux newbie but
> close to it. I've been using Ubuntu for the last few years (and tried a few
> other versions before that), but mostly as a "Typical Windows User", where I
> focus mostly on using the applications, not the OS. Anyway, perhaps because
> of that orientation, I have chosen Ubuntu and love it, and have switched all
> my learning efforts to applications that Ubuntu supports, e.g. Mythbuntu,
> StreamRipper, DVD authoring, OpenOffice (tho I'm getting real disappointed
> in Writer compared to M$ Word), lots more.
>
> So here's my problem report: I burned a verified ISO of Hardy Beta a
> couple weeks ago, and it installed flawlessly (after CD Check OK) on a new
> hard drive in a 5-year-old box I own, and I was using it a little with no
> problems on and off for a couple weeks, then last weekend it told me it had
> a bunch of updates (about 150 MB or 150 packages; I'm not sure) and that
> went flawlwssly too, and I did some more stuff and shut down normally. Now,
> when I power on, it appears to boot OK up to where the little orange thingie
> stops shuttling back and forth, and becomes a normal "progress bar", then it
> goes about 3 jumps till it's about 15% done and then just sits there
> forever. So I power off and on, then choose the previous version from the
> GRUB menu (I think it's kernel .12 to boot OK, rather than the .16 that
> fails). I will be happy to send some startup logs or sys info or whatever
> would help, but I don't know how to get them. I can run Terminal and browse
> the Filesystem and Locate and install new tools via the Package Manager. So
> if you want me to run some command-line utility, maybe with sudo, please
> tell me exactly what to type and I will pipe the output to a file and send
> it to you or whatever will help.
>
> In general, I would like to learn what troubleshooting/diagnostic tools I
> should use in a situation like this, so if you want to send me some URLs to
> those I will learn some more.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Jim Harris
>
> --
> When sitting down in front of a computer to do
> something useful, never say, or even think,
> "I will just do this quickly."
> --
> 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

Upgrading Hardy Heron 8.04 Beta to Linux kernel .16 breaks it; it won't boot.

[Jim and Judi Harris]

Hi. This is my first post to this kind of list. I'm not a Linux newbie but
close to it. I've been using Ubuntu for the last few years (and tried a few
other versions before that), but mostly as a "Typical Windows User", where I
focus mostly on using the applications, not the OS. Anyway, perhaps because
of that orientation, I have chosen Ubuntu and love it, and have switched all
my learning efforts to applications that Ubuntu supports, e.g. Mythbuntu,
StreamRipper, DVD authoring, OpenOffice (tho I'm getting real disappointed
in Writer compared to M$ Word), lots more.

So here's my problem report: I burned a verified ISO of Hardy Beta a couple
weeks ago, and it installed flawlessly (after CD Check OK) on a new hard
drive in a 5-year-old box I own, and I was using it a little with no
problems on and off for a couple weeks, then last weekend it told me it had
a bunch of updates (about 150 MB or 150 packages; I'm not sure) and that
went flawlwssly too, and I did some more stuff and shut down normally. Now,
when I power on, it appears to boot OK up to where the little orange thingie
stops shuttling back and forth, and becomes a normal "progress bar", then it
goes about 3 jumps till it's about 15% done and then just sits there
forever. So I power off and on, then choose the previous version from the
GRUB menu (I think it's kernel .12 to boot OK, rather than the .16 that
fails). I will be happy to send some startup logs or sys info or whatever
would help, but I don't know how to get them. I can run Terminal and browse
the Filesystem and Locate and install new tools via the Package Manager. So
if you want me to run some command-line utility, maybe with sudo, please
tell me exactly what to type and I will pipe the output to a file and send
it to you or whatever will help.

In general, I would like to learn what troubleshooting/diagnostic tools I
should use in a situation like this, so if you want to send me some URLs to
those I will learn some more.

Sincerely,

Jim Harris

-- 
When sitting down in front of a computer to do
something useful, never say, or even think,
"I will just do this quickly."
-- 
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: URGENT !!! : [USN-464-1] Linux kernel vulnerabilities

[Matt Zimmerman]

On Sun, May 27, 2007 at 11:22:30PM +0200, Thilo Six wrote:
> Matt Zimmerman wrote the following on 27.05.2007 22:48
> 
> >> now i
> >> $ aptitude install linux-image-2.6.20-16-generic
> >>
> >> and now nvidia is broken !!
> > 
> > You installed the new kernel, but forgot to install the corresponding
> > restricted-modules package.
> 
> sorry if i exaggerated a bit but i got this "green sticker on www.ubuntu.com
> feeling"
> 
> The right information to the right people at the right time can make the
> difference between a disaster and genius hat trick.
> I call that proactive.

I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean by any of this.

-- 
 - mdz

-- 
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: URGENT !!! : [USN-464-1] Linux kernel vulnerabilities

[Thilo Six]

Matt Zimmerman wrote the following on 27.05.2007 22:48

>> now i
>> $ aptitude install linux-image-2.6.20-16-generic
>>
>> and now nvidia is broken !!
> 
> You installed the new kernel, but forgot to install the corresponding
> restricted-modules package.

sorry if i exaggerated a bit but i got this "green sticker on www.ubuntu.com
feeling"

The right information to the right people at the right time can make the
difference between a disaster and genius hat trick.
I call that proactive.

but anyway what does it matter i made a mistake...

bye Thilo
-- 
i am on Ubuntu 2.6 KDE
- some friend of mine

gpg key: 0x4A411E09


-- 
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: URGENT !!! : [USN-464-1] Linux kernel vulnerabilities

[Matt Zimmerman]

On Sun, May 27, 2007 at 10:31:37AM +0200, Thilo Six wrote:
> now i
> $ aptitude install linux-image-2.6.20-16-generic
> 
> and now nvidia is broken !!

You installed the new kernel, but forgot to install the corresponding
restricted-modules package.

-- 
 - mdz

-- 
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: [USN-464-1] Linux kernel vulnerabilities

[Matt Zimmerman]

On Sat, May 26, 2007 at 11:27:45PM +0200, Thilo Six wrote:
> Hello
> 
> The kernel security update [USN-464-1] is missing s.th.

This is known to the security team, and being worked on.

-- 
 - mdz

-- 
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: URGENT !!! : [USN-464-1] Linux kernel vulnerabilities

[Thilo Six]

Thilo Six wrote the following on 27.05.2007 10:31
> Thilo Six wrote the following on 26.05.2007 23:27
>> Hello
>>
>> The kernel security update [USN-464-1] is missing s.th.
>>
>> $ sudo aptitude show linux-generic | grep depend
>> Depends: linux-image-generic, linux-restricted-modules-generic
>>
>> $ sudo aptitude show linux-image-generic | grep depen
>> Depends: linux-image-2.6.20-15-generic
>> ^^
>>
>> from USN:
>> Ubuntu 7.04:
>>   linux-image-2.6.20-16-generic2.6.20-16.28
>>  ^^
>>
>> $ sudo aptitude update
>> $ aptitude dist-upgrade
>> Reading package lists... Done
>> Building dependency tree
>> Reading state information... Done
>> Reading extended state information
>> Initializing package states... Done
>> Building tag database... Done
>> No packages will be installed, upgraded, or removed.
>> 0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
>> Need to get 0B of archives. After unpacking 0B will be used.
>>
>> $ apt-cache policy linux-generic
>> linux-generic:
>>   Installed: 2.6.20.15.14
>>   Candidate: 2.6.20.15.14
>>
>> $ apt-cache policy linux-image-generic
>> linux-image-generic:
>>   Installed: 2.6.20.15.14
>>   Candidate: 2.6.20.15.14
>>
>> HTH Thilo
> 
> What is was trying to say is the upgrade path is broken.
> 
> BUT
> 
> now i
> $ aptitude install linux-image-2.6.20-16-generic
> 
> and now nvidia is broken !!
> <-
> $ tail /var/log/Xorg.0.log
> (II) NVIDIA(0): enabled.
> 
> (EE) NVIDIA(0): Failed to load the NVIDIA kernel module!
> (EE) NVIDIA(0):  *** Aborting ***
> (II) UnloadModule: "nvidia"
> (II) UnloadModule: "ramdac"
> (II) UnloadModule: "fb"
> (EE) Screen(s) found, but none have a usable configuration.
> 
> Fatal server error:
> no screens found
> ->
> 
> $ uname --all
> Linux ub2 2.6.20-16-generic #2 SMP Wed May 23 01:46:23 UTC 2007 i686 GNU/Linux
> 
> bye Thilo

$ apt-cache policy linux-restricted-modules-2.6.20-16-generic
linux-restricted-modules-2.6.20-16-generic:
  Installed: (none)
  Candidate: 2.6.20.5-16.28

the upgrade path is horrible broken

-- 
i am on Ubuntu 2.6 KDE
- some friend of mine

gpg key: 0x4A411E09


-- 
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

URGENT !!! : [USN-464-1] Linux kernel vulnerabilities

[Thilo Six]

Thilo Six wrote the following on 26.05.2007 23:27
> Hello
>
> The kernel security update [USN-464-1] is missing s.th.
>
> $ sudo aptitude show linux-generic | grep depend
> Depends: linux-image-generic, linux-restricted-modules-generic
>
> $ sudo aptitude show linux-image-generic | grep depen
> Depends: linux-image-2.6.20-15-generic
> ^^
>
> from USN:
> Ubuntu 7.04:
>   linux-image-2.6.20-16-generic2.6.20-16.28
>  ^^
>
> $ sudo aptitude update
> $ aptitude dist-upgrade
> Reading package lists... Done
> Building dependency tree
> Reading state information... Done
> Reading extended state information
> Initializing package states... Done
> Building tag database... Done
> No packages will be installed, upgraded, or removed.
> 0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
> Need to get 0B of archives. After unpacking 0B will be used.
>
> $ apt-cache policy linux-generic
> linux-generic:
>   Installed: 2.6.20.15.14
>   Candidate: 2.6.20.15.14
>
> $ apt-cache policy linux-image-generic
> linux-image-generic:
>   Installed: 2.6.20.15.14
>   Candidate: 2.6.20.15.14
>
> HTH Thilo

What is was trying to say is the upgrade path is broken.

BUT

now i
$ aptitude install linux-image-2.6.20-16-generic

and now nvidia is broken !!
<-
$ tail /var/log/Xorg.0.log
(II) NVIDIA(0): enabled.

(EE) NVIDIA(0): Failed to load the NVIDIA kernel module!
(EE) NVIDIA(0):  *** Aborting ***
(II) UnloadModule: "nvidia"
(II) UnloadModule: "ramdac"
(II) UnloadModule: "fb"
(EE) Screen(s) found, but none have a usable configuration.

Fatal server error:
no screens found
->

$ uname --all
Linux ub2 2.6.20-16-generic #2 SMP Wed May 23 01:46:23 UTC 2007 i686 GNU/Linux

bye Thilo
-- 
i am on Ubuntu 2.6 KDE
- some friend of mine

gpg key: 0x4A411E09


-- 
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: [USN-464-1] Linux kernel vulnerabilities

[Thilo Six]

Hello

The kernel security update [USN-464-1] is missing s.th.

$ sudo aptitude show linux-generic | grep depend
Depends: linux-image-generic, linux-restricted-modules-generic

$ sudo aptitude show linux-image-generic | grep depen
Depends: linux-image-2.6.20-15-generic
^^

from USN:
Ubuntu 7.04:
  linux-image-2.6.20-16-generic2.6.20-16.28
 ^^

$ sudo aptitude update
$ aptitude dist-upgrade
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Reading extended state information
Initializing package states... Done
Building tag database... Done
No packages will be installed, upgraded, or removed.
0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 0B of archives. After unpacking 0B will be used.

$ apt-cache policy linux-generic
linux-generic:
  Installed: 2.6.20.15.14
  Candidate: 2.6.20.15.14

$ apt-cache policy linux-image-generic
linux-image-generic:
  Installed: 2.6.20.15.14
  Candidate: 2.6.20.15.14

HTH Thilo
-- 
i am on Ubuntu 2.6 KDE
- some friend of mine

gpg key: 0x4A411E09


-- 
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