/usr/src/kernels
Hi All, Can I get rid on any of these? All the non fc38 ones? All of them? # ls -al /usr/src/kernels total 44 drwxr-xr-x. 11 root root 4096 Aug 26 16:05 . drwxr-xr-x. 5 root root 4096 Jan 18 2023 .. drwxr-xr-x. 23 root root 4096 Dec 10 2022 5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 drwxr-xr-x. 24 root root 4096 Jul 6 21:48 6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 drwxr-xr-x. 24 root root 4096 Dec 10 2022 6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 drwxr-xr-x. 25 root root 4096 Jul 6 21:48 6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 drwxr-xr-x. 25 root root 4096 Jul 6 21:48 6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 drwxr-xr-x. 25 root root 4096 Jul 6 21:48 6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 drwxr-xr-x. 25 root root 4096 Aug 26 16:05 6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64 drwxr-xr-x. 25 root root 4096 Aug 26 16:05 6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64 drwxr-xr-x. 25 root root 4096 Aug 26 16:04 6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64 Many thanks, -T ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: What is "Fedora, with Xen"?
On 8/28/23 16:45, ToddAndMargo via users wrote: Hi All, What is "Fedora , with Xen"? https://imgur.com/fgABpIz.png The red dot in the middle is the flash shooting through my finger. Found this: # find /boot -iname \*xen\* /boot/xen-4.17.2.config /boot/xen-4.17.2.gz /boot/flask/xenpolicy-4.17.2 But it only one instance. I have severn showing at boot time. ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: ARM
Den tis 29 aug. 2023 kl 07:35 skrev ToddAndMargo via users : Hi All, You guys give me the link to the current Fedora ARM project. And I lost it. Would you mind giving it to me again? Many thanks, -T On 8/28/23 23:06, Luna Jernberg wrote: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM > Thank you! Would not happen to know any ARM tablets running it? ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: /usr/lib/modules cleanup?
On 8/28/23 20:27, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote: On 28 Aug 2023 at 18:37, ToddAndMargo via users wrote: Hi All, Fedora 38 I got stuff all the way back to fc31. Can I delete all the non fc38 directories? Can't say sure, but what I have done on my machines. I generally use /lib/modules that is link t /usr/lib/modules. Generally found that only 3 of the directories are actually valid linked to the 3 latest kernels. The other ones are generally much smaller and just left offer stuff that somehow stopped the automatic removal from working. Thank you! I used the following # cd /usr/lib/modules # mkdir temp # mv $( ls | grep -i fc | grep -v fc38 ) /usr/lib/modules/temp/. # ls /usr/lib/modules/temp | grep -i fc38 # ls 6.3.11-200.fc38.x86_64 6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64 6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64 6.3.12-200.fc38.x86_64 6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64 temp ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: What is "Fedora, with Xen"?
Den tis 29 aug. 2023 kl 01:45 skrev ToddAndMargo via users : Hi All, What is "Fedora , with Xen"? https://imgur.com/fgABpIz.png The red dot in the middle is the flash shooting through my finger. $ rpm -qa | grep -i "xen\|fedora" fedora-icon-theme-1.0.0-28.fc33.noarch fedora-logos-38.1.0-1.fc38.noarch fedora-release-identity-basic-38-36.noarch fedora-logos-httpd-38.1.0-1.fc38.noarch fedora-logos-classic-38.1.0-1.fc38.noarch fedora-gpg-keys-38-1.noarch fedora-release-38-36.noarch fedora-repos-38-1.noarch fedora-release-common-38-36.noarch libreport-fedora-2.17.11-1.fc38.x86_64 fedora-release-matecompiz-38-36.noarch fedora-repos-modular-38-1.noarch fedora-rpm-macros-26-14.fc38.noarch edk2-ovmf-xen-20230524-3.fc38.noarch libvirt-daemon-xen-9.0.0-3.fc38.x86_64 xen-licenses-4.17.2-1.fc38.x86_64 xen-libs-4.17.2-1.fc38.x86_64 xen-hypervisor-4.17.2-1.fc38.x86_64 xen-runtime-4.17.2-1.fc38.x86_64 xen-4.17.2-1.fc38.x86_64 Many thanks, -T On 8/28/23 22:53, Luna Jernberg wrote: > Guessing its Fedora running on the Xen Hypervisor maybe? > https://xenproject.org/ or with support for it atleast? > I am running qemu-kvm. But I do not remember every running Xen? Maybe 15 years ago? Can I get rid of Xen? And how? ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: /usr/lib/modules cleanup?
On 8/28/23 20:26, Jeffrey Walton wrote: On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 9:37 PM ToddAndMargo via users wrote: Fedora 38 I got stuff all the way back to fc31. Can I delete all the non fc38 directories? Removing old kernels leaves artifacts in /lib/modules, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2185410 Jeff Ah Ha! Thank you ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: ARM
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM Den tis 29 aug. 2023 kl 07:35 skrev ToddAndMargo via users : > > Hi All, > > You guys give me the link to the current > Fedora ARM project. And I lost it. > > Would you mind giving it to me again? > > Many thanks, > -T > > -- > > Yesterday it worked. > Today it is not working. > Windows is like that. > > ___ > users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org > Do not reply to spam, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: [Test Week] F39 Anaconda WebUI Installer for Workstation is underway!
Hey! Helped out some yesterday, and will help out as much as i have time and energy during the week Den tis 29 aug. 2023 kl 04:02 skrev Sumantro Mukherjee : > > Hey folks, > > This week we will be testing the new Anaconda WebUI installer written with > React and Cockpit. This installer will be default for Workstation for now and > we would like to run through as many tests as possible from [0]. > Note from developers/other likely scenarios are > a) Test the new mount point assignment UI and for this the most likely > use case will be that the user will create the partitioning manually > using blivet-gui (which can now be started from the WebUI interface) > and then switch to the mount point assignment and assign/map the > created devices to mount points > b) Test any system with multiple types of disks a combination (LVM and > RAID), and different bootloader configs. > > [0] https://testdays.fedoraproject.org/events/165 > > -- > //sumantro > Fedora QE > TRIED AND PERSONALLY TESTED, ERGO TRUSTED > ___ > users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org > Do not reply to spam, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: What is "Fedora, with Xen"?
Guessing its Fedora running on the Xen Hypervisor maybe? https://xenproject.org/ or with support for it atleast? Den tis 29 aug. 2023 kl 01:45 skrev ToddAndMargo via users : > > Hi All, > > What is "Fedora , with Xen"? > > https://imgur.com/fgABpIz.png > > The red dot in the middle is the flash > shooting through my finger. > > $ rpm -qa | grep -i "xen\|fedora" > fedora-icon-theme-1.0.0-28.fc33.noarch > fedora-logos-38.1.0-1.fc38.noarch > fedora-release-identity-basic-38-36.noarch > fedora-logos-httpd-38.1.0-1.fc38.noarch > fedora-logos-classic-38.1.0-1.fc38.noarch > fedora-gpg-keys-38-1.noarch > fedora-release-38-36.noarch > fedora-repos-38-1.noarch > fedora-release-common-38-36.noarch > libreport-fedora-2.17.11-1.fc38.x86_64 > fedora-release-matecompiz-38-36.noarch > fedora-repos-modular-38-1.noarch > fedora-rpm-macros-26-14.fc38.noarch > edk2-ovmf-xen-20230524-3.fc38.noarch > libvirt-daemon-xen-9.0.0-3.fc38.x86_64 > xen-licenses-4.17.2-1.fc38.x86_64 > xen-libs-4.17.2-1.fc38.x86_64 > xen-hypervisor-4.17.2-1.fc38.x86_64 > xen-runtime-4.17.2-1.fc38.x86_64 > xen-4.17.2-1.fc38.x86_64 > > > Many thanks, > -T > > -- > ~~ > Computers are like air conditioners. > They malfunction when you open windows > ~~ > ___ > users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org > Do not reply to spam, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
ARM
Hi All, You guys give me the link to the current Fedora ARM project. And I lost it. Would you mind giving it to me again? Many thanks, -T -- Yesterday it worked. Today it is not working. Windows is like that. ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: /usr/lib/modules cleanup?
On 28 Aug 2023 at 18:37, ToddAndMargo via users wrote: Date sent: Mon, 28 Aug 2023 18:37:11 -0700 To: Community support for Fedora users Subject:/usr/lib/modules cleanup? Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users From: ToddAndMargo via users Copies to: ToddAndMargo > Hi All, > > Fedora 38 > > I got stuff all the way back to fc31. > > Can I delete all the non fc38 directories? > Can't say sure, but what I have done on my machines. I generally use /lib/modules that is link t /usr/lib/modules. Generally found that only 3 of the directories are actually valid linked to the 3 latest kernels. The other ones are generally much smaller and just left offer stuff that somehow stopped the automatic removal from working. Have a script cleanmodules2 #!/bin/bash x=$(du . -d 1 | sort -n|grep -v "[0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]" | cut -s -f2 -d/) for a in $x; do echo "$a"; rm ./"$a"/* -f -r; rmdir "$a"; done But would recommend running it without the rm and rmdir lines to make sure it isn't going to remove anything that is valid first. Example of results I get. Current directory is already clean so nothing removed. du . -d 1 | sort -n 128640 ./6.4.11-100.fc37.x86_64 128652 ./6.4.12-100.fc37.x86_64 128668 ./6.4.10-100.fc37.x86_64 385968 . Generally old directories would have sizes smaller that 6 digits, grep -v "[0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]" filters out all directories with 6 digits or more for size. cut -s elimanates the last line that doesn't have a second field after the / The loop then processes each of the resulting directories to remove the files and then remove directory. That has worked for me, but you setup might be different. Might be way to validate against kernel files in /boot or entries in /boot/local/entries but this works for me. getting the ones to keep ls -1 /boot | grep vmlinuz | grep -v rescue |cut -b9-100 or ls -1 /boot/loader/entries/ | grep x86_64 | cut -f2,3 -d- | sed 's/.conf//g' Both give me 6.4.10-100.fc37.x86_64 6.4.11-100.fc37.x86_64 6.4.12-100.fc37.x86_64 Would have to think about how to have it delete everything but thoses?? Good Luck. Perhaps someone else has a better process. > Many thanks, > -T > > > # cd /usr/lib/modules > # ls > 5.14.16-201.fc34.x86_64 > 5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 > 6.2.9-200.fc37.x86_64 > 5.14.16-301.fc35.x86_64 > 5.5.17-200.fc31.x86_64 > 6.3.11-200.fc38.x86_64 > 5.14.18-300.fc35.x86_64 > 5.6.6-200.fc31.x86_64 > 6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 > 5.14.9-200.fc34.x86_64 > 5.6.7-200.fc31.x86_64 > 6.3.12-200.fc38.x86_64 > 5.15.10-200.fc35.x86_64 > 6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 > 6.3.7-100.fc37.x86_64 > 5.15.16-200.fc35.x86_64 > 6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 > 6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 > 5.15.18-200.fc35.x86_64 > 6.2.10-200.fc37.x86_64 > 6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64 > 5.15.4-201.fc35.x86_64 > 6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 > 6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64 > 5.15.6-200.fc35.x86_64 > 6.2.13-200.fc37.x86_64 > 6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64 > 5.16.8-200.fc35.x86_64 > 6.2.15-200.fc37.x86_64 > > -- > ~~ > Computers are like air conditioners. > They malfunction when you open windows > ~~ > ___ > users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org > Do not reply to spam, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue ++ Michael D. Setzer II - Computer Science Instructor (Retired) mailto:mi...@guam.net mailto:msetze...@gmail.com Guam - Where America's Day Begins G4L Disk Imaging Project maintainer http://sourceforge.net/projects/g4l/ ++ ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: /usr/lib/modules cleanup?
On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 9:37 PM ToddAndMargo via users wrote: > > Fedora 38 > > I got stuff all the way back to fc31. > > Can I delete all the non fc38 directories? Removing old kernels leaves artifacts in /lib/modules, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2185410 Jeff ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: /usr/lib/modules cleanup?
On 8/28/23 18:37, ToddAndMargo via users wrote: Hi All, Fedora 38 I got stuff all the way back to fc31. Can I delete all the non fc38 directories? Many thanks, -T If this helps: # rpm -qa | grep -i fc | grep -iv fc38 gpg-pubkey-cfc659b9-5b6eac67 I no longer have any rpm installed under fc38 ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: [Test Week] F39 Anaconda WebUI Installer for Workstation is underway!
On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 7:48 AM Geoffrey Leach wrote: > > H I guess I haven't been paying attention. Can someone point me > at the spe for this? > > On Tue, 29 Aug 2023 07:31:28 +0530 > Sumantro Mukherjee wrote: > > > Hey folks, > > > > This week we will be testing the new Anaconda WebUI installer written > > with React and Cockpit. This installer will be default for > > Workstation for now and we would like to run through as many tests as > > possible from [0]. Note from developers/other likely scenarios are > > a) Test the new mount point assignment UI and for this the most likely > > use case will be that the user will create the partitioning manually > > using blivet-gui (which can now be started from the WebUI interface) > > and then switch to the mount point assignment and assign/map the > > created devices to mount points > > b) Test any system with multiple types of disks a combination (LVM and > > RAID), and different bootloader configs. > > > > [0] https://testdays.fedoraproject.org/events/165 > > > Hey Geoffrey, spe? I would need some more context. All of this started with this changeset https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/AnacondaWebUIforFedoraWorkstation The test day wiki is http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2023-08-28_Anaconda_Web_UI -- //sumantro Fedora QE TRIED AND PERSONALLY TESTED, ERGO TRUSTED ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: [Test Week] F39 Anaconda WebUI Installer for Workstation is underway!
H I guess I haven't been paying attention. Can someone point me at the spe for this? On Tue, 29 Aug 2023 07:31:28 +0530 Sumantro Mukherjee wrote: > Hey folks, > > This week we will be testing the new Anaconda WebUI installer written > with React and Cockpit. This installer will be default for > Workstation for now and we would like to run through as many tests as > possible from [0]. Note from developers/other likely scenarios are > a) Test the new mount point assignment UI and for this the most likely > use case will be that the user will create the partitioning manually > using blivet-gui (which can now be started from the WebUI interface) > and then switch to the mount point assignment and assign/map the > created devices to mount points > b) Test any system with multiple types of disks a combination (LVM and > RAID), and different bootloader configs. > > [0] https://testdays.fedoraproject.org/events/165 > ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Test Week] F39 Anaconda WebUI Installer for Workstation is underway!
Hey folks, This week we will be testing the new Anaconda WebUI installer written with React and Cockpit. This installer will be default for Workstation for now and we would like to run through as many tests as possible from [0]. Note from developers/other likely scenarios are a) Test the new mount point assignment UI and for this the most likely use case will be that the user will create the partitioning manually using blivet-gui (which can now be started from the WebUI interface) and then switch to the mount point assignment and assign/map the created devices to mount points b) Test any system with multiple types of disks a combination (LVM and RAID), and different bootloader configs. [0] https://testdays.fedoraproject.org/events/165 -- //sumantro Fedora QE TRIED AND PERSONALLY TESTED, ERGO TRUSTED ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
/usr/lib/modules cleanup?
Hi All, Fedora 38 I got stuff all the way back to fc31. Can I delete all the non fc38 directories? Many thanks, -T # cd /usr/lib/modules # ls 5.14.16-201.fc34.x86_64 5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 6.2.9-200.fc37.x86_64 5.14.16-301.fc35.x86_64 5.5.17-200.fc31.x86_64 6.3.11-200.fc38.x86_64 5.14.18-300.fc35.x86_64 5.6.6-200.fc31.x86_64 6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 5.14.9-200.fc34.x86_64 5.6.7-200.fc31.x86_64 6.3.12-200.fc38.x86_64 5.15.10-200.fc35.x86_64 6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 6.3.7-100.fc37.x86_64 5.15.16-200.fc35.x86_64 6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 5.15.18-200.fc35.x86_64 6.2.10-200.fc37.x86_64 6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64 5.15.4-201.fc35.x86_64 6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64 5.15.6-200.fc35.x86_64 6.2.13-200.fc37.x86_64 6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64 5.16.8-200.fc35.x86_64 6.2.15-200.fc37.x86_64 -- ~~ Computers are like air conditioners. They malfunction when you open windows ~~ ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Too many Kernels at boot
On 8/28/23 17:05, Robert Nichols wrote: On 8/28/23 18:54, ToddAndMargo via users wrote: On 8/27/23 21:07, Samuel Sieb wrote: On 8/27/23 20:20, Jeffrey Walton wrote: On Sun, Aug 27, 2023 at 11:05 PM ToddAndMargo via users wrote: Fedora 38 When I boot up, I get a bazillion kernel choices, most are not Fedora 38: Sorry for the flash. I could not turn it to turn off https://imgur.com/7Mi5E3W.png The extra kernels are from Fedora 37 and 36. This is what Fedora 38 says I have: $ rpm -qa kernel kernel-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64 kernel-6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64 kernel-6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64 Do I really have all those extra kernels? How do I clean things up? Look in /boot to see if there are actually kernels and initrd files for the entries. If there are, you will have to manually delete them. Look in /boot/loader/entries/ to see if there are conf files for those entries and delete the ones that don't match installed kernel packages. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/upgrading-fedora-offline/#sect-clean-up-old-kernels That won't help in this case because the relevant entries don't have installed packages. Hi All, Sam's directions worked perfectly. Thank you Sam! My new boot menu: https://imgur.com/fgABpIz.png The red smudge in the middle is my flash shooting through my finger. Chuckle. -T This is what I did: How to remove kernels that are not suppose to be there and do not show in rpm: # rpm -qa kernel kernel-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64 kernel-6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64 kernel-6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64 Note: substitute fc38 with your current kernel revision $ su # cd /boot # ls | grep -i vmlinuz vmlinuz-0-rescue-25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2 vmlinuz-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64 # ls | grep -i fc | grep -v fc38 config-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 config-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 config-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 config-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 config-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 config-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 initramfs-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64.img initramfs-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64.img initramfs-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64.img initramfs-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64.img initramfs-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64.img initramfs-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64.img symvers-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64.gz symvers-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64.gz symvers-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64.gz symvers-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64.gz symvers-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64.gz symvers-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64.gz System.map-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 System.map-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 System.map-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 System.map-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 System.map-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 System.map-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 # mkdir temp # mv $( ls | grep -i fc | grep -v fc38 ) /boot/temp/. # cd /boot/loader/entries # ls | grep -i fc | grep -v fc38 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64.conf # mkdir temp # mv $( ls | grep -i fc | grep -v fc38 ) /boot/loader/entries/temp/. # ls 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-0-memtest86+.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-0-rescue.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64.conf $ reboot How about the /usr/lib/modules directory? You probably still have all the modules for the old kernels there. There were a ton of them. I am making a new post on it. ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Too many Kernels at boot
The prior rpm -e that uninstalled the kernel rpms (no telling how long ago this was) was unable to remove stuff from boot becuse of likely some issue with /boot not being mounted, or read only or several other possible issues. This is why kernel and inits do not get removed from /boor but the rpm is long gone. On Mon, Aug 28, 2023, 7:30 PM Robert Nichols wrote: > On 8/28/23 19:16, Roger Heflin wrote:> On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 7:06 PM > Robert Nichols > > wrote: > >> > >> On 8/28/23 18:54, ToddAndMargo via users wrote: > >>> On 8/27/23 21:07, Samuel Sieb wrote: > On 8/27/23 20:20, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 27, 2023 at 11:05 PM ToddAndMargo via users > > wrote: > >> > >> Fedora 38 > >> > >> When I boot up, I get a bazillion kernel choices, > >> most are not Fedora 38: > >> > >> Sorry for the flash. I could not turn it > >> to turn off > >> > >> https://imgur.com/7Mi5E3W.png > >> > >> The extra kernels are from Fedora 37 and 36. > >> > >> This is what Fedora 38 says I have: > >> > >> $ rpm -qa kernel > >> kernel-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64 > >> kernel-6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64 > >> kernel-6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64 > >> > >> Do I really have all those extra kernels? > >> > >> How do I clean things up? > > Look in /boot to see if there are actually kernels and initrd files > for the entries. If there are, you will have to manually delete them. > Look in /boot/loader/entries/ to see if there are conf files for > those entries and delete the ones that don't match installed kernel > packages. > > > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/upgrading-fedora-offline/#sect-clean-up-old-kernels > > That won't help in this case because the relevant entries don't have > installed packages. > >>> > >>> Hi All, > >>> > >>> Sam's directions worked perfectly. Thank you Sam! > >>> > >>> My new boot menu: > >>> https://imgur.com/fgABpIz.png > >>> > >>> The red smudge in the middle is my flash shooting > >>> through my finger. Chuckle. > >>> > >>> -T > >>> > >>> This is what I did: > >>> > >>> How to remove kernels that are not suppose to be there > >>> and do not show in rpm: > >>> > >>> # rpm -qa kernel > >>> kernel-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64 > >>> kernel-6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64 > >>> kernel-6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64 > >>> > >>> > >>> Note: substitute fc38 with your current kernel revision > >>> > >>> $ su > >>> # cd /boot > >>> > >>> # ls | grep -i vmlinuz > >>> vmlinuz-0-rescue-25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2 > >>> vmlinuz-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 > >>> vmlinuz-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 > >>> vmlinuz-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 > >>> vmlinuz-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 > >>> vmlinuz-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 > >>> vmlinuz-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 > >>> vmlinuz-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64 > >>> vmlinuz-6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64 > >>> vmlinuz-6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64 > >>> > >>> # ls | grep -i fc | grep -v fc38 > >>> config-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 > >>> config-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 > >>> config-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 > >>> config-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 > >>> config-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 > >>> config-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 > >>> initramfs-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64.img > >>> initramfs-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64.img > >>> initramfs-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64.img > >>> initramfs-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64.img > >>> initramfs-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64.img > >>> initramfs-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64.img > >>> symvers-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64.gz > >>> symvers-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64.gz > >>> symvers-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64.gz > >>> symvers-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64.gz > >>> symvers-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64.gz > >>> symvers-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64.gz > >>> System.map-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 > >>> System.map-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 > >>> System.map-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 > >>> System.map-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 > >>> System.map-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 > >>> System.map-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 > >>> vmlinuz-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 > >>> vmlinuz-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 > >>> vmlinuz-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 > >>> vmlinuz-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 > >>> vmlinuz-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 > >>> vmlinuz-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 > >>> > >>> > >>> # mkdir temp > >>> # mv $( ls | grep -i fc | grep -v fc38 ) /boot/temp/. > >>> > >>> # cd /boot/loader/entries > >>> # ls | grep -i fc | grep -v fc38 > >>> 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64.conf > >>> 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64.conf > >>> 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64.conf > >>> 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64.conf > >>> 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64.conf > >>> 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64.conf > >>> > >>> # mkdir temp > >>> # mv $( ls | grep -i fc | grep -v fc38 ) /boot/loader/entries/temp/. > >>> # ls > >>> 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-0-memtest86+.conf > >>> 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-0-rescue.conf > >>> 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64.conf >
Re: Too many Kernels at boot
On 8/28/23 19:16, Roger Heflin wrote:> On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 7:06 PM Robert Nichols wrote: On 8/28/23 18:54, ToddAndMargo via users wrote: On 8/27/23 21:07, Samuel Sieb wrote: On 8/27/23 20:20, Jeffrey Walton wrote: On Sun, Aug 27, 2023 at 11:05 PM ToddAndMargo via users wrote: Fedora 38 When I boot up, I get a bazillion kernel choices, most are not Fedora 38: Sorry for the flash. I could not turn it to turn off https://imgur.com/7Mi5E3W.png The extra kernels are from Fedora 37 and 36. This is what Fedora 38 says I have: $ rpm -qa kernel kernel-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64 kernel-6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64 kernel-6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64 Do I really have all those extra kernels? How do I clean things up? Look in /boot to see if there are actually kernels and initrd files for the entries. If there are, you will have to manually delete them. Look in /boot/loader/entries/ to see if there are conf files for those entries and delete the ones that don't match installed kernel packages. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/upgrading-fedora-offline/#sect-clean-up-old-kernels That won't help in this case because the relevant entries don't have installed packages. Hi All, Sam's directions worked perfectly. Thank you Sam! My new boot menu: https://imgur.com/fgABpIz.png The red smudge in the middle is my flash shooting through my finger. Chuckle. -T This is what I did: How to remove kernels that are not suppose to be there and do not show in rpm: # rpm -qa kernel kernel-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64 kernel-6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64 kernel-6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64 Note: substitute fc38 with your current kernel revision $ su # cd /boot # ls | grep -i vmlinuz vmlinuz-0-rescue-25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2 vmlinuz-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64 # ls | grep -i fc | grep -v fc38 config-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 config-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 config-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 config-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 config-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 config-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 initramfs-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64.img initramfs-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64.img initramfs-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64.img initramfs-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64.img initramfs-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64.img initramfs-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64.img symvers-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64.gz symvers-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64.gz symvers-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64.gz symvers-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64.gz symvers-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64.gz symvers-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64.gz System.map-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 System.map-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 System.map-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 System.map-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 System.map-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 System.map-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 # mkdir temp # mv $( ls | grep -i fc | grep -v fc38 ) /boot/temp/. # cd /boot/loader/entries # ls | grep -i fc | grep -v fc38 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64.conf # mkdir temp # mv $( ls | grep -i fc | grep -v fc38 ) /boot/loader/entries/temp/. # ls 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-0-memtest86+.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-0-rescue.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64.conf $ reboot ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue How about the /usr/lib/modules directory? You probably still have all the modules for the old kernels there. Those will probably actually be gone. The way you get these is if the /boot is not visible and/or mounted and/or hidden during the rpm removal or there is another /boot that was incorrectly mounted at the time over the right boot. The exact same thing also happens with installs, if wrong /boot then the kernel/initramfs gets installed something that is not used during boot. In the post to which I was replying, the "rpm" command was
Re: Too many Kernels at boot
Those will probably actually be gone. The way you get these is if the /boot is not visible and/or mounted and/or hidden during the rpm removal or there is another /boot that was incorrectly mounted at the time over the right boot. The exact same thing also happens with installs, if wrong /boot then the kernel/initramfs gets installed something that is not used during boot. On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 7:06 PM Robert Nichols wrote: > > On 8/28/23 18:54, ToddAndMargo via users wrote: > > On 8/27/23 21:07, Samuel Sieb wrote: > >> On 8/27/23 20:20, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > >>> On Sun, Aug 27, 2023 at 11:05 PM ToddAndMargo via users > >>> wrote: > > Fedora 38 > > When I boot up, I get a bazillion kernel choices, > most are not Fedora 38: > > Sorry for the flash. I could not turn it > to turn off > > https://imgur.com/7Mi5E3W.png > > The extra kernels are from Fedora 37 and 36. > > This is what Fedora 38 says I have: > > $ rpm -qa kernel > kernel-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64 > kernel-6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64 > kernel-6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64 > > Do I really have all those extra kernels? > > How do I clean things up? > >> > >> Look in /boot to see if there are actually kernels and initrd files for > >> the entries. If there are, you will have to manually delete them. > >> Look in /boot/loader/entries/ to see if there are conf files for those > >> entries and delete the ones that don't match installed kernel packages. > >> > >>> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/upgrading-fedora-offline/#sect-clean-up-old-kernels > >> > >> That won't help in this case because the relevant entries don't have > >> installed packages. > > > > Hi All, > > > > Sam's directions worked perfectly. Thank you Sam! > > > > My new boot menu: > > https://imgur.com/fgABpIz.png > > > > The red smudge in the middle is my flash shooting > > through my finger. Chuckle. > > > > -T > > > > This is what I did: > > > > How to remove kernels that are not suppose to be there > > and do not show in rpm: > > > > # rpm -qa kernel > > kernel-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64 > > kernel-6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64 > > kernel-6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64 > > > > > > Note: substitute fc38 with your current kernel revision > > > > $ su > > # cd /boot > > > > # ls | grep -i vmlinuz > > vmlinuz-0-rescue-25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2 > > vmlinuz-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 > > vmlinuz-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 > > vmlinuz-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 > > vmlinuz-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 > > vmlinuz-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 > > vmlinuz-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 > > vmlinuz-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64 > > vmlinuz-6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64 > > vmlinuz-6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64 > > > > # ls | grep -i fc | grep -v fc38 > > config-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 > > config-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 > > config-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 > > config-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 > > config-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 > > config-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 > > initramfs-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64.img > > initramfs-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64.img > > initramfs-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64.img > > initramfs-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64.img > > initramfs-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64.img > > initramfs-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64.img > > symvers-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64.gz > > symvers-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64.gz > > symvers-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64.gz > > symvers-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64.gz > > symvers-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64.gz > > symvers-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64.gz > > System.map-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 > > System.map-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 > > System.map-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 > > System.map-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 > > System.map-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 > > System.map-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 > > vmlinuz-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 > > vmlinuz-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 > > vmlinuz-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 > > vmlinuz-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 > > vmlinuz-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 > > vmlinuz-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 > > > > > > # mkdir temp > > # mv $( ls | grep -i fc | grep -v fc38 ) /boot/temp/. > > > > # cd /boot/loader/entries > > # ls | grep -i fc | grep -v fc38 > > 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64.conf > > 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64.conf > > 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64.conf > > 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64.conf > > 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64.conf > > 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64.conf > > > > # mkdir temp > > # mv $( ls | grep -i fc | grep -v fc38 ) /boot/loader/entries/temp/. > > # ls > > 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-0-memtest86+.conf > > 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-0-rescue.conf > > 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64.conf > > 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64.conf > > 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64.conf > > > > > > $ reboot > > ___ > > users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org > > To unsubscribe send an
Re: Too many Kernels at boot
On 8/28/23 18:54, ToddAndMargo via users wrote: On 8/27/23 21:07, Samuel Sieb wrote: On 8/27/23 20:20, Jeffrey Walton wrote: On Sun, Aug 27, 2023 at 11:05 PM ToddAndMargo via users wrote: Fedora 38 When I boot up, I get a bazillion kernel choices, most are not Fedora 38: Sorry for the flash. I could not turn it to turn off https://imgur.com/7Mi5E3W.png The extra kernels are from Fedora 37 and 36. This is what Fedora 38 says I have: $ rpm -qa kernel kernel-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64 kernel-6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64 kernel-6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64 Do I really have all those extra kernels? How do I clean things up? Look in /boot to see if there are actually kernels and initrd files for the entries. If there are, you will have to manually delete them. Look in /boot/loader/entries/ to see if there are conf files for those entries and delete the ones that don't match installed kernel packages. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/upgrading-fedora-offline/#sect-clean-up-old-kernels That won't help in this case because the relevant entries don't have installed packages. Hi All, Sam's directions worked perfectly. Thank you Sam! My new boot menu: https://imgur.com/fgABpIz.png The red smudge in the middle is my flash shooting through my finger. Chuckle. -T This is what I did: How to remove kernels that are not suppose to be there and do not show in rpm: # rpm -qa kernel kernel-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64 kernel-6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64 kernel-6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64 Note: substitute fc38 with your current kernel revision $ su # cd /boot # ls | grep -i vmlinuz vmlinuz-0-rescue-25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2 vmlinuz-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64 # ls | grep -i fc | grep -v fc38 config-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 config-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 config-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 config-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 config-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 config-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 initramfs-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64.img initramfs-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64.img initramfs-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64.img initramfs-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64.img initramfs-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64.img initramfs-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64.img symvers-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64.gz symvers-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64.gz symvers-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64.gz symvers-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64.gz symvers-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64.gz symvers-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64.gz System.map-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 System.map-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 System.map-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 System.map-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 System.map-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 System.map-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 # mkdir temp # mv $( ls | grep -i fc | grep -v fc38 ) /boot/temp/. # cd /boot/loader/entries # ls | grep -i fc | grep -v fc38 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64.conf # mkdir temp # mv $( ls | grep -i fc | grep -v fc38 ) /boot/loader/entries/temp/. # ls 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-0-memtest86+.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-0-rescue.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64.conf $ reboot ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue How about the /usr/lib/modules directory? You probably still have all the modules for the old kernels there. -- Bob Nichols "NOSPAM" is really part of my email address. Do NOT delete it. ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam,
Re: Too many Kernels at boot
On 8/27/23 21:07, Samuel Sieb wrote: On 8/27/23 20:20, Jeffrey Walton wrote: On Sun, Aug 27, 2023 at 11:05 PM ToddAndMargo via users wrote: Fedora 38 When I boot up, I get a bazillion kernel choices, most are not Fedora 38: Sorry for the flash. I could not turn it to turn off https://imgur.com/7Mi5E3W.png The extra kernels are from Fedora 37 and 36. This is what Fedora 38 says I have: $ rpm -qa kernel kernel-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64 kernel-6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64 kernel-6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64 Do I really have all those extra kernels? How do I clean things up? Look in /boot to see if there are actually kernels and initrd files for the entries. If there are, you will have to manually delete them. Look in /boot/loader/entries/ to see if there are conf files for those entries and delete the ones that don't match installed kernel packages. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/upgrading-fedora-offline/#sect-clean-up-old-kernels That won't help in this case because the relevant entries don't have installed packages. Hi All, Sam's directions worked perfectly. Thank you Sam! My new boot menu: https://imgur.com/fgABpIz.png The red smudge in the middle is my flash shooting through my finger. Chuckle. -T This is what I did: How to remove kernels that are not suppose to be there and do not show in rpm: # rpm -qa kernel kernel-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64 kernel-6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64 kernel-6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64 Note: substitute fc38 with your current kernel revision $ su # cd /boot # ls | grep -i vmlinuz vmlinuz-0-rescue-25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2 vmlinuz-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64 # ls | grep -i fc | grep -v fc38 config-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 config-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 config-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 config-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 config-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 config-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 initramfs-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64.img initramfs-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64.img initramfs-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64.img initramfs-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64.img initramfs-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64.img initramfs-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64.img symvers-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64.gz symvers-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64.gz symvers-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64.gz symvers-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64.gz symvers-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64.gz symvers-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64.gz System.map-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 System.map-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 System.map-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 System.map-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 System.map-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 System.map-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64 vmlinuz-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64 # mkdir temp # mv $( ls | grep -i fc | grep -v fc38 ) /boot/temp/. # cd /boot/loader/entries # ls | grep -i fc | grep -v fc38 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-5.18.10-200.fc36.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.0.11-300.fc37.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.0.12-200.fc36.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.2.12-200.fc37.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.3.12-100.fc37.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.3.8-100.fc37.x86_64.conf # mkdir temp # mv $( ls | grep -i fc | grep -v fc38 ) /boot/loader/entries/temp/. # ls 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-0-memtest86+.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-0-rescue.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64.conf 25f870556c344b599c639eb386296fa2-6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64.conf $ reboot ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
What is "Fedora, with Xen"?
Hi All, What is "Fedora , with Xen"? https://imgur.com/fgABpIz.png The red dot in the middle is the flash shooting through my finger. $ rpm -qa | grep -i "xen\|fedora" fedora-icon-theme-1.0.0-28.fc33.noarch fedora-logos-38.1.0-1.fc38.noarch fedora-release-identity-basic-38-36.noarch fedora-logos-httpd-38.1.0-1.fc38.noarch fedora-logos-classic-38.1.0-1.fc38.noarch fedora-gpg-keys-38-1.noarch fedora-release-38-36.noarch fedora-repos-38-1.noarch fedora-release-common-38-36.noarch libreport-fedora-2.17.11-1.fc38.x86_64 fedora-release-matecompiz-38-36.noarch fedora-repos-modular-38-1.noarch fedora-rpm-macros-26-14.fc38.noarch edk2-ovmf-xen-20230524-3.fc38.noarch libvirt-daemon-xen-9.0.0-3.fc38.x86_64 xen-licenses-4.17.2-1.fc38.x86_64 xen-libs-4.17.2-1.fc38.x86_64 xen-hypervisor-4.17.2-1.fc38.x86_64 xen-runtime-4.17.2-1.fc38.x86_64 xen-4.17.2-1.fc38.x86_64 Many thanks, -T -- ~~ Computers are like air conditioners. They malfunction when you open windows ~~ ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Too many Kernels at boot
On 29/8/23 01:19, Jeffrey Walton wrote: On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 11:16 AM Roger Heflin wrote: Possible ways, are if the /boot was not mounted when a prior kernel removal was done, or if something else was mounted over boot when that kernel removal was done. Not removing the last kernel during dnf-sysytem-upgrade is by design. You have to manually remove the old kernel(s) from previous versions of Fedora. My experience with this is you don't have to, new kernel installs subsequent to the dnf-system-upgrade remove the oldest kernel relative to the install limit irrespective of whether that kernel is the for the current OS or the previous OS. For example, I have an install limit of 5, and I used dnf-system-upgrade to upgrade from F37 to F38, and currently I don't have any F37 kernels in /boot because the dnf installs of the F38 kernels auto-removed the F37 kernels each time. regards, Steve Jeff ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue OpenPGP_0x594338B1DE179AB2.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Too many Kernels at boot
On 8/28/23 07:23, Tim via users wrote: On Sun, 2023-08-27 at 20:04 -0700, ToddAndMargo via users wrote: Sorry for the flash. I could not turn it to turn off https://imgur.com/7Mi5E3W.png Just by the by, if you're faced with that flash issue again, you could simply cover the flash with your finger, or something else. It doesn't matter now, we can read around it well enough. Considering the number of time I have taken picture of my fingers, that should of opccured to me! :'( ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: TPM Error on Warm Boot From F38
On 28/8/23 10:55, Samuel Sieb wrote: On 8/26/23 17:53, Stephen Morris wrote: Hi, Since the last system update I have been getting TPM errors on every entry in my grub menu when I do a warm restart from F38, and this includes the menu entry for the kernel I used to boot into F38. I am getting multiple occurrences of the following message: error: ../../grub-core/commands/efi/tpm.c:150:unknown TPM error. I am also getting the message: error: ../../grub-core/net/net.c:1552:disk 'hd2,gpt7' not found. The second message doesn't make sense as that is the device that contains F38 that I had booted into before doing the restart, and the device I've booted into to send this email. Those errors do suggest an issue with the UEFI BIOS. If you open the grub console instead of trying to boot an entry, what happens when you try to look at the drive. Can you see it? What partitions does it show? To answer Stan's question from earlier, I've had lots of warm start reboots since updating the bios and adding in the keys for the nvidia drivers. Trying to identify which package may be causing the issue might be problematic, as I was on holidays for 6 weeks and did an update when I got back, which updated around 350 packages. I'll check the grub console when I reboot my system. One other thing I forgot to mention, there is also an entry in the menu to boot into a UEFI shell, and when I try to boot into that it also gets the tpm errors. Just as an off-topic question, hd2 is my solid state drive containing windows drive C, the UEFI partitions for Windows, F38 and Ubuntu, and the F38 and Ubuntu /boot partitions. That drive is plugged into the first physical port on the motherboard, so why does F38 not see it as hd0? The two drives it sees as hd0 and hd1 are plugged into ports 3 - 6 (I've got 4 3 TB hard drives). regards, Steve ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue OpenPGP_0x594338B1DE179AB2.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: unwanted login
> Date: Monday, August 28, 2023 19:09:43 + > From: Beartooth > > One of my F38 machines has taken to demanding that I login over > and over. I want not to have to login at all. (I'm the sole user, > and at home.) Fwiw, I'm running xscreensaver under Mate. Where and > how do I reconfigure? On the screensaver configuration screen (under the "system/preferences/look and feel/screensaver" pulldown) there's a "lock screen when screensaver active" checkbox. I suspect that if you uncheck that you'll get the action you desire. ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: unwanted login
On Mon, 28 Aug 2023 19:09:43 - (UTC) Beartooth wrote: > One of my F38 machines has taken to demanding that I login > over and over. I want not to have to login at all. (I'm the sole > user, and at home.) Fwiw, I'm running popup is not working at the > moment, but if you under Mate. Where and how do I reconfigure? My xscreensaver popup is not working at the moment, but if you poke around you will find a configuration option to solve your problem. ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
unwanted login
One of my F38 machines has taken to demanding that I login over and over. I want not to have to login at all. (I'm the sole user, and at home.) Fwiw, I'm running xscreensaver under Mate. Where and how do I reconfigure? -- Beartooth Staffwright, Not Quite Clueless Power User Remember I know little (precious little!) of where up is. ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Last kernel update leads to emergency mode
On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 3:25 PM stan wrote: > > > Thanks, Stan. I guess the files are almost similar, since they have > > almost the same size: > > I agree. Your issue isn't the issue I had. Debugging these early > issues is hard, because it has to be done from the emergency console. > But, I think I remember there being other consoles to switch to that > had things like logs, and there are some commands available, if you do > an > ls /usr/bin > or > ls /usr/sbin > you should be able to examine the system to some extent to find why it > is failing. I remember using less and vi at least. Could you mount > one of the partitions and save / cp or cat the logs to a file there, > maybe in your home directory. Then you can examine them from a working > system, and even attach them to a bugzilla or email. > > > # ls -n /boot/initramfs* > > -rw---. 1 0 0 83396891 Jan 21 2020 > > /boot/initramfs-0-rescue-5cbe81aa795444b29a47ec1bf2b6dca1.img > > -rw---. 1 0 0 37876860 Aug 14 11:45 > > /boot/initramfs-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64.img > > -rw---. 1 0 0 37878341 Aug 26 12:28 > > /boot/initramfs-6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64.img Thanks, Stan. Finally, I was able to capture the log of journalctl -xb which is at: https://bugzilla-attachments.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1985687 Paul ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Too many Kernels at boot
On 8/28/23 13:00, Joe Zeff wrote: On 08/28/2023 08:20 AM, Tim via users wrote: YUM/DNF/RPM is not counting how many kernels you have on disc, it's counting how many kernel packages it installed. It didn't install the kernels of your previous releases. I don't think so. I've upgraded Fedora installs many times, and watched the kernels from the previous version gradually vanish from GRUB as new ones get installed. This is my observation as well ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Too many Kernels at boot
On 08/28/2023 08:20 AM, Tim via users wrote: YUM/DNF/RPM is not counting how many kernels you have on disc, it's counting how many kernel packages it installed. It didn't install the kernels of your previous releases. I don't think so. I've upgraded Fedora installs many times, and watched the kernels from the previous version gradually vanish from GRUB as new ones get installed. ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Too many Kernels at boot
On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 11:16 AM Roger Heflin wrote: > > Possible ways, are if the /boot was not mounted when a prior kernel > removal was done, or if something else was mounted over boot when that > kernel removal was done. Not removing the last kernel during dnf-sysytem-upgrade is by design. You have to manually remove the old kernel(s) from previous versions of Fedora. Jeff ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Too many Kernels at boot
Possible ways, are if the /boot was not mounted when a prior kernel removal was done, or if something else was mounted over boot when that kernel removal was done. Or if you have a dual boot system both using the same /boot directory (but different rootvgs). Each install would manage the rpms that it knows about but each could have up to their install limit. Or installs of kernel.orgs via those makefiles (but none of his seem to be this). Mine does seem to keep track of prior versions kernels as the rpm for that kernel is still installed (unless one of the above happened). On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 9:51 AM Barry wrote: > > > > > On 28 Aug 2023, at 13:09, Mauricio Tavares wrote: > > > > I guess using installonly_limit to tell it how many kernels to keep no > > longer works? > > It is working on all my fedora hosts. Even honoured by dnf system-upgrade. > > But this is not the first time someone has reported having too many kernels > in /boot. > I am not sure how this can happen has been determined, but it seems to be > rare. > > Barry > > ___ > users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org > Do not reply to spam, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Too many Kernels at boot
> On 28 Aug 2023, at 13:09, Mauricio Tavares wrote: > > I guess using installonly_limit to tell it how many kernels to keep no > longer works? It is working on all my fedora hosts. Even honoured by dnf system-upgrade. But this is not the first time someone has reported having too many kernels in /boot. I am not sure how this can happen has been determined, but it seems to be rare. Barry ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: TPM Error on Warm Boot From F38
On Sun, 27 Aug 2023 10:59:26 -0600 Joe Zeff wrote: > On 08/27/2023 10:17 AM, stan via users wrote: > > It sounds like a bug. I think the messages are being generated > > because when the system tries to mount the restarted partition, it > > is already mounted because of the restart, and so you get both > > errors. > > Shouldn't the journal show that it was mounted during the restart? As Samuel pointed out, this is long before any system is running, so nothing is saved in the journal because it isn't available yet when these errors occur. ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: TPM Error on Warm Boot From F38
On Sun, 27 Aug 2023 17:53:24 -0700 Samuel Sieb wrote: > On 8/27/23 09:17, stan via users wrote: > > On Sun, 27 Aug 2023 10:53:48 +1000 > > Stephen Morris wrote: > > > > Caveat: I don't have any knowledge about the tpm and grub2 > > interaction. > >> Can anyone suggest what I need to look at to try to determine > >> why this error is occurring? > > > > It sounds like a bug. I think the messages are being generated > > because when the system tries to mount the restarted partition, it > > is already mounted because of the restart, and so you get both > > errors. The > > There's no way for the partition to be mounted. That doesn't even > make sense. The OS isn't running, so "mounted" isn't a thing. Sure, what you say makes sense, but then why is the partition not being recognized? Is it somehow marked as in use because of the suspend? It is being recognized during regular boot, so what is different during a warm restart? ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Too many Kernels at boot
On Sun, 2023-08-27 at 20:04 -0700, ToddAndMargo via users wrote: > Sorry for the flash. I could not turn it > to turn off > > https://imgur.com/7Mi5E3W.png Just by the by, if you're faced with that flash issue again, you could simply cover the flash with your finger, or something else. It doesn't matter now, we can read around it well enough. -- uname -rsvp Linux 3.10.0-1160.95.1.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Mon Jul 24 13:59:37 UTC 2023 x86_64 Boilerplate: All unexpected mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted. I will only get to see the messages that are posted to the mailing list. ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Too many Kernels at boot
On Mon, 2023-08-28 at 08:08 -0400, Mauricio Tavares wrote: > I guess using installonly_limit to tell it how many kernels to keep no > longer works? > > [raub@some-host ~]$ fgrep installonly_limit /etc/yum.conf > # installonly_limit=5 > installonly_limit=3 YUM/DNF/RPM keeps track of what *it* has installed. But *it* didn't install something on a previous release. So, if you had installed 3 versions of Fedora on the drive, and if two releases ago you had 2 kernels, one release ago it had 3 kernels, and this release has 4 kernels. You have 9 kernels installed, but the current OS only installed 4 of them. And if your install-limit was 4, it's just going to maintain the 4 kernels of the current release. YUM/DNF/RPM is not counting how many kernels you have on disc, it's counting how many kernel packages it installed. It didn't install the kernels of your previous releases. How GRUB maintains itself is another matter. Look in your /boot. Does it contain as many kernels as the GRUB menu? If not, it's just GRUB you need to fix up. If you do have a gazillion kernels, but you don't have a multi-boot system (you just have one release, the current one). You could delete the old kernel files, and fix up GRUB. If you have a gazillion kernels, and you do have a multi-boot system, where you can boot into the previous installation. Well, you could boot into a prior release and deal with its kernels through RPM/YUM/DNF. -- uname -rsvp Linux 3.10.0-1160.95.1.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Mon Jul 24 13:59:37 UTC 2023 x86_64 Boilerplate: All unexpected mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted. I will only get to see the messages that are posted to the mailing list. ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: best practices for configuring multiple VirtualHost Apache WWW servers in Fedora?
Tim: >> The conf.d/*.conf files are processed in alphabetical order, so name >> your default virtual host's configuration file to be picked first (e.g. >> 000-default.conf). Filenames don't have to be the same as the domain >> name, by the way. Franta Hanzlík: > IMO this alphabetical order processing (assuming that provided > the conf.d/*.conf files are either vhost-only, or no-vhost-only (ie the > definition for the "main" server)) is only relevant for determining what > the "default" virtual server (serving to other vhost unassigned requests) > will be. If you look at the main httpd.conf file, this is at the very end: begin my paste # Supplemental configuration # # Load config files in the "/etc/httpd/conf.d" directory, if any. IncludeOptional conf.d/*.conf end of my paste In essence there's just one big configuration file, composed of the main file with all the conf.d entries as a part of it. They're included into it (which will be an alphabetically ordered import). But since the main configuration file doesn't have anything else after it (as mine currently stands), they're simply appended to it (in alphabetic sorted order). And THEN that conglomeration is parsed (which will have its own set of rules). So, the alphabetical sorting should only make any difference where... Something that's found first is considered first for something, or something that's found last gets to override a previous settings. Though many things don't have any priority. The default virtual host is simply the first virtual host defined, and any traffic that doesn't appear to belong to any particular virtual host is dealt with by it. In the past, that would have been a server in the main configuration, these days it's the first virtual host. Either way, it may be prudent to make it serve an error notice. > - So when all vhosts listen on all interfaces and all their IPs and > using only standard ports 80/http and 443/https there will be one > "default" server for http and one "default" for https. I think it's more a case of Apache listens, and is the handler to deal with this traffic goes here or there. Rather than multiple Apaches listening to everything to see if something is supposed to be for them, and ignoring what isn't. I have more virtual hosts configured then there are Apache processes running. But yes, there could be one default HTTP and one default HTTPS, and you could define them both with just one conf file. The confusing thing is when someone is simply going to serve one website, doesn't really need virtual hosts, yet has to delve into them because of some outside requirement (such as some oddball requirements of one of the certificate issuers). -- uname -rsvp Linux 3.10.0-1160.95.1.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Mon Jul 24 13:59:37 UTC 2023 x86_64 Boilerplate: All unexpected mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted. I will only get to see the messages that are posted to the mailing list. ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Last kernel update leads to emergency mode
On Sat, Aug 26, 2023 at 3:30 PM stan via users wrote: > > > > > I have been able to take a screen-shot: > > > > > > > > https://i.imgur.com/nAsE6i6.jpg > > > > > > This means that dracut was unable to start systemd in order to > > > continue the boot once the initramfs was finished creating the > > > bootstrap. I have had this happen, but not with stock kernels. I > > > build custom kernels, and dracut was not building a complete > > > initramfs when they were installed. I had to write a script that > > > created a custom file that told dracut to include all missing > > > libraries, and run dracut again after install to fix the problem. > > > The missing libraries included some vital systemd libraries. > > > Because library versions change, I run the script to be sure that > > > the custom file includes the latest libraries. If this *is* the > > > cause, it will be obvious in /boot. The failing initramfs size will > > > be about half the size of an initramfs file that works. I could > > > not find any reason that dracut wasn't working properly when it > > > first installed the kernel; all the settings said it should have > > > put those libraries in, but I just could not get it to do so. > > > > > > If it is your issue, post back and I'll attach the file of > > > libraries and the directory to put it in, as well as the dracut > > > command to run. They might not work for you, since the version has > > > to be included. There is also a way to actually examine what is in > > > the initramfs, so you could see if the systemd libraries were > > > there. From the dracut man page, > > > > > > Inspecting the Contents > > >To see the contents of the image created by dracut, you can > > > use the lsinitrd tool. > > > > > ># lsinitrd | less > > > > > >To display the contents of a file in the initramfs also use > > > the lsinitrd tool: > > > > > ># lsinitrd -f /etc/ld.so.conf > > >include ld.so.conf.d/*.conf > > > > Thanks to all for your help! > > > > I have meanwhile been able to take photos from the > > > > journalctl -xb > > > > output, and I think that now the cause of the problem is isolated. > > > > I was hopeful that the new kernel update would fix the problem, but > > it did not. > > > > The photos of the journalctl logs are at: > > > > https://i.imgur.com/NJAjOmN.jpg > > You didn't show the listing of the /boot directory. > > ls -n /boot/ > or > ls -n /boot/initramfs* > > Is the initramfs for the failing kernel smaller than the initramfs for > the successful kernel? If you can still boot into an older kernel, you > can try rebuilding the initramfs manually, to see if it will fix any > problem. You have to run this within the /boot directory, as root or > sudo. Your command should be something like the following. > > # /usr/bin/dracut -f -v --no-compress --no-uefi > initramfs-6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64.img --kver 6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64 > > I use no compression and no uefi, but you can remove those if they don't fit > your system. > > Once you have a new initramfs, run lsinitrd on it and redirect it into > a file. Do the same for a working initramfs. Then run a diff on the > two with the output piped to less. For example, > > lsinitrd /boot/initramfs-6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64.img > new_initramfs.txt > lsinitrd /boot/initramfs-6.4.8-200.fc38.x86_64.img > old_initramfs.txt > diff old_initramfs.txt new_initramfs.txt | less > > There should be almost no differences if the initramfs is OK. Thanks, Stan. I guess the files are almost similar, since they have almost the same size: # ls -n /boot/initramfs* -rw---. 1 0 0 83396891 Jan 21 2020 /boot/initramfs-0-rescue-5cbe81aa795444b29a47ec1bf2b6dca1.img -rw---. 1 0 0 37876860 Aug 14 11:45 /boot/initramfs-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64.img -rw---. 1 0 0 37878341 Aug 26 12:28 /boot/initramfs-6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64.img # Paul ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Too many Kernels at boot
On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 12:08 AM Samuel Sieb wrote: > > On 8/27/23 20:20, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 27, 2023 at 11:05 PM ToddAndMargo via users > > wrote: > >> > >> Fedora 38 > >> > >> When I boot up, I get a bazillion kernel choices, > >> most are not Fedora 38: > >> > >> Sorry for the flash. I could not turn it > >> to turn off > >> > >> https://imgur.com/7Mi5E3W.png > >> > >> The extra kernels are from Fedora 37 and 36. > >> > >> This is what Fedora 38 says I have: > >> > >> $ rpm -qa kernel > >> kernel-6.4.10-200.fc38.x86_64 > >> kernel-6.4.11-200.fc38.x86_64 > >> kernel-6.4.12-200.fc38.x86_64 > >> > >> Do I really have all those extra kernels? > >> > >> How do I clean things up? > > Look in /boot to see if there are actually kernels and initrd files for > the entries. If there are, you will have to manually delete them. > Look in /boot/loader/entries/ to see if there are conf files for those > entries and delete the ones that don't match installed kernel packages. > > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/upgrading-fedora-offline/#sect-clean-up-old-kernels > > That won't help in this case because the relevant entries don't have > installed packages. > I guess using installonly_limit to tell it how many kernels to keep no longer works? [raub@some-host ~]$ fgrep installonly_limit /etc/yum.conf # installonly_limit=5 installonly_limit=3 [raub@some-host ~]$ ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: best practices for configuring multiple VirtualHost Apache WWW servers in Fedora?
On Mon, 28 Aug 2023 12:13:35 +0930
Tim wrote:
> On Sun, 2023-08-27 at 17:39 +0200, Franta Hanzlík via users wrote:
> > There is also the question of security and resistance to attacks from
> > the Internet. And since the attacks will most likely go to the IP address
> > (not the ServerName), it might be a good idea to make one more (fake)
> > Virtualhost as the default ("first listed") VirtualHost - and on it have
> > minimal configuration, secure DocumentRoot and so on). Or am I mistaken?
>
> Correct that attacks will go to the IP address, and you're probably
> more likely to get IP scanning finding you than someone targeting a
> particular domain. Though the reverse may be true if you publish
> anything that triggers the dingbats on the internet.
>
> Also correct that you may want to ensure a particular virtual host is
> your default one. You may want that to be your main website, you may
> want that to be some kind of defensive configuration. There's another
> advantage in the default virtual host being the wrong website, it may
> aid you in checking you've configured things right for your real
> website.
>
> The conf.d/*.conf files are processed in alphabetical order, so name
> your default virtual host's configuration file to be picked first (e.g.
> 000-default.conf). Filenames don't have to be the same as the domain
> name, by the way.
> --
IMO this alphabetical order processing (assuming that provided
the conf.d/*.conf files are either vhost-only, or no-vhost-only (ie the
definition for the "main" server)) is only relevant for determining what
the "default" virtual server (serving to other vhost unassigned requests)
will be. Because according to
https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/vhosts/details.html:
"Essentially, the main server is treated as "defaults" or a "base" on which to
build each vhost.
But the positioning of these main server definitions in the config file is
largely irrelevant -- the entire config of the main server has been parsed when
this final merging occurs.
So even if a main server definition appears after a vhost definition it might
affect the vhost definition."
So the process of building the configuration of individual vhosts looks
like this (IMO):
- After loading all .conf files, the "main" server configuration is created -
which
serves as default parameters for all vhosts.
- Then the configuration of individual vhosts is built, where the definition
from the alphabetically first file (matching the IP:port request) determines
the "default" server.
- So when all vhosts listen on all interfaces and all their IPs and using only
standard ports 80/http and 443/https there will be one "default" server
for http and one "default" for https.
---
Franta Hanzlik
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
