Re: F40 and breaking file command change

[Michael Schwendt]

On Wed, 1 May 2024 23:10:18 -0400, Jeffrey Walton wrote:

> I was amazed the file project broke the command. The projects I contribute
> to will move mountains to avoid breaking established behavior. We don't
> want to screw our users like that.

In such a case, your script ought to apply some safety measures.
Like putting some guards in front that verify that the printed type for
specific files matches your expectations. It wouldn't take much to maintain
your own small set of input files as an automatic test-suite.

The "file" type output has changed before. And the printed types are better
not parsed as a full sentence but as individual keywords in a set. Your
primary interest seems to be in detecting the term "CSV".

Various scripts that rely on console output have broken before, mistakenly
expecting specific status/error/whatever messages.
--
___
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: F40 and breaking file command change

[Jeffrey Walton]

On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 5:03 AM Michael Schwendt  wrote:

> On Wed, 1 May 2024 23:10:18 -0400, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
>
> > I was amazed the file project broke the command. The projects I
> contribute
> > to will move mountains to avoid breaking established behavior. We don't
> > want to screw our users like that.
>
> In such a case, your script ought to apply some safety measures.
> Like putting some guards in front that verify that the printed type for
> specific files matches your expectations. It wouldn't take much to maintain
> your own small set of input files as an automatic test-suite.
>

I thought the same thing about the file program. The change should have
caused a regression when running its self tests. The authors should  have
known there was a problem with what they did.


> The "file" type output has changed before. And the printed types are better
> not parsed as a full sentence but as individual keywords in a set. Your
> primary interest seems to be in detecting the term "CSV".
>
> Various scripts that rely on console output have broken before, mistakenly
> expecting specific status/error/whatever messages.


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: F40 and breaking file command change

[Michael Schwendt]

On Fri, 3 May 2024 05:30:21 -0400, Jeffrey Walton wrote:

> I thought the same thing about the file program. The change should have
> caused a regression when running its self tests. The authors should  have
> known there was a problem with what they did.

It's more likely that the file program's test-suite would ensure that
recognizing CSV files still works for a limited set of test files. And
even that would not be entirely safe, since the same files would classify
also as other file types. The printed types are not carved into stone
forever. What about the difference between ASCII text and UTF-8 text, for
example? Regardless of what file format it may be.

Perhaps use file --mime-type instead. It would print "text/csv".

Either way, I would not rely on "file" when trying to detect CSV files.
--
___
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

Fail2ban is failing

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

F40 fully updated.

   # systemctl status fail2ban
   × fail2ban.service - Fail2Ban Service
Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/fail2ban.service; enabled; 
preset: disabled)
   Drop-In: /usr/lib/systemd/system/service.d
└─10-timeout-abort.conf
Active: failed (Result: exit-code) since Fri 2024-05-03 11:56:20 BST; 
29min ago
  Duration: 30.380s
  Docs: man:fail2ban(1)
   Process: 19362 ExecStartPre=/bin/mkdir -p /run/fail2ban (code=exited, 
status=0/SUCCESS)
   Process: 19364 ExecStart=/usr/bin/fail2ban-server -xf start 
(code=exited, status=255/EXCEPTION)
  Main PID: 19364 (code=exited, status=255/EXCEPTION)
   CPU: 172ms
   
   May 03 11:55:50 Bree systemd[1]: Starting fail2ban.service - Fail2Ban 
Service...
   May 03 11:55:50 Bree systemd[1]: Started fail2ban.service - Fail2Ban Service.
   May 03 11:56:20 Bree systemd[1]: fail2ban.service: Main process exited, 
code=exited, status=255/EXCEPTION
   
Also:

   # fail2ban-client status sshd
   2024-05-03 12:28:41,129 fail2ban[22672]: ERROR   Failed to 
access socket path: /var/run/fail2ban/fail2ban.sock. Is fail2ban running?
   
I updated to 1.0.2-13 from updates-testing. Made no difference.

For completeness:

   # fail2ban-client -t
   OK: configuration test is successful
   
Any thoughts? I've been using f2b for a while and it has worked so far.
My configuration hasn't changed in any way.

poc
--
___
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: Fail2ban is failing

[Richard Shaw]

On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 6:31 AM Patrick O'Callaghan 
wrote:

> F40 fully updated.
>

Try a `dnf --refresh update`. The fix just went to stable last night.

Thanks,
Richard
--
___
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: Fail2ban is failing

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Fri, 2024-05-03 at 06:45 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
> On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 6:31 AM Patrick O'Callaghan
> 
> wrote:
> 
> > F40 fully updated.
> > 
> 
> Try a `dnf --refresh update`. The fix just went to stable last night.

That just gets the same update I already tried.

poc
--
___
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: Fail2ban is failing

[Tom Rivers via users]

Until the fix is available, I've been able to get it running until the 
next system reboot by doing the following:


# setenforce 0
# systemctl start fail2ban

... wait a minute ...

# setenforce 1

Tom

On 5/3/2024 12:39 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:

On Fri, 2024-05-03 at 06:45 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:

On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 6:31 AM Patrick O'Callaghan

wrote:


F40 fully updated.


Try a `dnf --refresh update`. The fix just went to stable last night.

That just gets the same update I already tried.

poc
--
___
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

How to increase size of /boot partition

[richard emberson]

Just today I upgraded from 39 to 40 but there was an issue:
dnf told me I needed some 800k more space in my /boot partition to proceed.
I had two kernels in /boot so I dnf removed those associated with the older
of the two kernels. I then successfully upgraded.
I fear the next time I do a dnf update which includes a new kernel I will
be told, again, that there is not enough space in my /boot partition.

So, how can I increase the size of the /boot partition? Many partitions,
like /tmp, are bigger than they need to be.

Here is what how the /sda disk is organized.
$ lsblk
NAME  MAJ:MIN RM   SIZE RO TYPE  MOUNTPOINTS
sda 8:00 223.6G  0 disk
├─sda1  8:10   250M  0 part  /boot
├─sda2  8:20 105.5G  0 part
│ └─luks-a2ebb2b0-527d-47f3-83ef-e5908805f31d
│ 253:30 105.5G  0 crypt /ssd
├─sda3  8:30  97.7G  0 part
│ └─luks-35719a97-5898-4420-9a56-1576ffdc6db3
│ 253:10  97.7G  0 crypt /
├─sda4  8:40 1K  0 part
├─sda5  8:50   9.8G  0 part
│ └─luks-5ee2ed8e-4bdf-43e1-adb0-34a70610a77f
│ 253:20   9.8G  0 crypt /tmp
└─sda6  8:60   9.8G  0 part
  └─luks-03c06df8-f9b9-4f0d-847e-79a7ed527888
  253:00   9.8G  0 crypt [SWAP]

$ df -h
Filesystem  Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/dm-196G   22G   70G  25% /
devtmpfs4.0M 0  4.0M   0% /dev
tmpfs16G 0   16G   0% /dev/shm
tmpfs   6.3G  1.8M  6.3G   1% /run
/dev/sda1   237M  179M   42M  82% /boot
/dev/dm-2   9.5G  260K  9.0G   1% /tmp
/dev/dm-3   104G  193M   99G   1% /ssd
/dev/dm-4   1.9T  1.2T  630G  66% /home
/dev/dm-5   1.7T  903G  736G  56% /data1
/dev/dm-620G   12G  6.9G  63% /var
tmpfs   3.2G  152K  3.2G   1% /run/user/1000


Thanks for any help give.

I realize one way is to backup /home and then reinstall Fedora but
1) that seems like a lot of work and
2) it would mean that the machine in question would then have to
use Wayland rather than Xorg.

Richard
--
___
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 to increase size of /boot partition

[richard emberson]

Just today I upgraded from 39 to 40 but there was an issue:
dnf told me I needed some 800k more space in my /boot partition to proceed.
I had two kernels in /boot so I dnf removed those associated with the older
of the two kernels. I then successfully upgraded.
I fear the next time I do a dnf update which includes a new kernel I will
be told, again, that there is not enough space in my /boot partition.

So, how can I increase the size of the /boot partition? Many partitions,
like /tmp, are bigger than they need to be.

Here is what how the /sda disk is organized.
$ lsblk
NAME  MAJ:MIN RM   SIZE RO TYPE  MOUNTPOINTS
sda 8:00 223.6G  0 disk
├─sda1  8:10   250M  0 part  /boot
├─sda2  8:20 105.5G  0 part
│ └─luks-a2ebb2b0-527d-47f3-83ef-e5908805f31d
│ 253:30 105.5G  0 crypt /ssd
├─sda3  8:30  97.7G  0 part
│ └─luks-35719a97-5898-4420-9a56-1576ffdc6db3
│ 253:10  97.7G  0 crypt /
├─sda4  8:40 1K  0 part
├─sda5  8:50   9.8G  0 part
│ └─luks-5ee2ed8e-4bdf-43e1-adb0-34a70610a77f
│ 253:20   9.8G  0 crypt /tmp
└─sda6  8:60   9.8G  0 part
   └─luks-03c06df8-f9b9-4f0d-847e-79a7ed527888
   253:00   9.8G  0 crypt [SWAP]

$ df -h
Filesystem  Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/dm-196G   22G   70G  25% /
devtmpfs4.0M 0  4.0M   0% /dev
tmpfs16G 0   16G   0% /dev/shm
tmpfs   6.3G  1.8M  6.3G   1% /run
/dev/sda1   237M  179M   42M  82% /boot
/dev/dm-2   9.5G  260K  9.0G   1% /tmp
/dev/dm-3   104G  193M   99G   1% /ssd
/dev/dm-4   1.9T  1.2T  630G  66% /home
/dev/dm-5   1.7T  903G  736G  56% /data1
/dev/dm-620G   12G  6.9G  63% /var
tmpfs   3.2G  152K  3.2G   1% /run/user/1000


Thanks for any help give.

I realize one way is to backup /home and then reinstall Fedora but
1) that seems like a lot of work,
2) it would mean that the machine in question would then have to
use Wayland rather than Xorg and
3) with Wayland I could not use xfce4.

Richard
--
___
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: How to increase size of /boot partition

[Samuel Sieb]

On 5/3/24 13:55, richard emberson wrote:

Just today I upgraded from 39 to 40 but there was an issue:
dnf told me I needed some 800k more space in my /boot partition to proceed.
I had two kernels in /boot so I dnf removed those associated with the older
of the two kernels. I then successfully upgraded.
I fear the next time I do a dnf update which includes a new kernel I will
be told, again, that there is not enough space in my /boot partition.

So, how can I increase the size of the /boot partition? Many partitions,
like /tmp, are bigger than they need to be.

Here is what how the /sda disk is organized.
$ lsblk
NAME  MAJ:MIN RM   SIZE RO TYPE  
MOUNTPOINTS

sda 8:0    0 223.6G  0 disk
├─sda1  8:1    0   250M  0 part  /boot
├─sda2  8:2    0 105.5G  0 part
│ └─luks-a2ebb2b0-527d-47f3-83ef-e5908805f31d
│ 253:3    0 105.5G  0 crypt /ssd
├─sda3  8:3    0  97.7G  0 part
│ └─luks-35719a97-5898-4420-9a56-1576ffdc6db3
│ 253:1    0  97.7G  0 crypt /
├─sda4  8:4    0 1K  0 part
├─sda5  8:5    0   9.8G  0 part
│ └─luks-5ee2ed8e-4bdf-43e1-adb0-34a70610a77f
│ 253:2    0   9.8G  0 crypt /tmp
└─sda6  8:6    0   9.8G  0 part
    └─luks-03c06df8-f9b9-4f0d-847e-79a7ed527888
    253:0    0   9.8G  0 crypt [SWAP]

$ df -h
Filesystem  Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/dm-1    96G   22G   70G  25% /
devtmpfs    4.0M 0  4.0M   0% /dev
tmpfs    16G 0   16G   0% /dev/shm
tmpfs   6.3G  1.8M  6.3G   1% /run
/dev/sda1   237M  179M   42M  82% /boot
/dev/dm-2   9.5G  260K  9.0G   1% /tmp
/dev/dm-3   104G  193M   99G   1% /ssd
/dev/dm-4   1.9T  1.2T  630G  66% /home
/dev/dm-5   1.7T  903G  736G  56% /data1
/dev/dm-6    20G   12G  6.9G  63% /var
tmpfs   3.2G  152K  3.2G   1% /run/user/1000


This looks like you've been upgrading for a very long time.  This type 
of layout and partition sizes is ancient.  /tmp isn't even a partition now.


The easiest option would be to use a live boot, shrink the /ssd 
partition by 1GB, shift it forward, then give that space to /boot.  I 
assume that gparted can handle LUKS.  And of course, make sure you have 
a backup for whatever is in that partition if it's important.


An alternative would be to reformat the /tmp partition for /boot, move 
the contents, adjust fstab, and update grub.  But that's a lot more 
space than needed.



Thanks for any help give.

I realize one way is to backup /home and then reinstall Fedora but
1) that seems like a lot of work,


Yes, but maybe it's time. :-)


2) it would mean that the machine in question would then have to
use Wayland rather than Xorg and


Why would that be?  You must have been listening to some misinformation. 
 If your current install can use Xorg, then re-installing won't be any 
different.



3) with Wayland I could not use xfce4.


If you install with xfce, then that's what you'll be using...
--
___
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: How to increase size of /boot partition

[Go Canes]

On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 1:52 PM richard emberson  wrote:
>
> Just today I upgraded from 39 to 40 but there was an issue:
> dnf told me I needed some 800k more space in my /boot partition to proceed.
> I had two kernels in /boot so I dnf removed those associated with the older
> of the two kernels. I then successfully upgraded.
> I fear the next time I do a dnf update which includes a new kernel I will
> be told, again, that there is not enough space in my /boot partition.

I recently had to resize my /boot.  The original install was several
Fedora versions back was 500MB, and more recent installs are 1GB.

What I did was backup my file systems to an external USB drive, boot
off the netinstall ISO, re-partition, re-mkfs, restore, then go
through all the UUID hassles recently documented in another thread.
If you have a sufficient drive to use for backups this may be the
easiest solution - it is probably the safest.

You are using LUKS which may complicate things.
--
___
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: Fail2ban is failing

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Fri, 2024-05-03 at 13:08 -0400, Tom Rivers via users wrote:
> Until the fix is available, I've been able to get it running until
> the 
> next system reboot by doing the following:
> 
> # setenforce 0
> # systemctl start fail2ban
> 
> ... wait a minute ...
> 
> # setenforce 1
> 

That seems to work. Looks like a problem with SElinux labelling.

poc
--
___
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: F40 and breaking file command change

[Samuel Sieb]

On 5/3/24 02:30, Jeffrey Walton wrote:



On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 5:03 AM Michael Schwendt > wrote:


On Wed, 1 May 2024 23:10:18 -0400, Jeffrey Walton wrote:

 > I was amazed the file project broke the command. The projects I
contribute
 > to will move mountains to avoid breaking established behavior. We
don't
 > want to screw our users like that.

In such a case, your script ought to apply some safety measures.
Like putting some guards in front that verify that the printed type for
specific files matches your expectations. It wouldn't take much to
maintain
your own small set of input files as an automatic test-suite.


I thought the same thing about the file program. The change should have 
caused a regression when running its self tests. The authors should  
have known there was a problem with what they did.


It was an intentional change.  If the test failed, they would have 
changed the test.

--
___
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: How to increase size of /boot partition

[Tom Horsley]

On Fri, 3 May 2024 13:55:49 -0700
richard emberson wrote:

> So, how can I increase the size of the /boot partition? Many partitions,
> like /tmp, are bigger than they need to be.

Might be worth a reinstall from scratch. I always make just a single /
partition and let all those other things be subdirectories. Never run
out of space unless the whole system runs out of space. You might be able to
do that with various copies of other partitions, renames, and merging
all the partitions into one with a disk tool running on a live image,
but probably have to reinstall grub at a minimum to make it work and
if I tried it, I'd probably screw something up and have to reinstall
anyway :-).
--
___
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: How to increase size of /boot partition

[Samuel Sieb]

On 5/3/24 14:03, Samuel Sieb wrote:
The easiest option would be to use a live boot, shrink the /ssd 
partition by 1GB, shift it forward, then give that space to /boot.  I 
assume that gparted can handle LUKS.  And of course, make sure you have 
a backup for whatever is in that partition if it's important.


This might require a grub update depending on what happens during the 
resize of /boot.  I'm not sure if grub uses fixed offsets to the files 
in /boot.  I haven't used bios boot for a long 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: How to increase size of /boot partition

[John Pilkington]

On 03/05/2024 18:52, richard emberson wrote:

Just today I upgraded from 39 to 40 but there was an issue:
dnf told me I needed some 800k more space in my /boot partition to proceed.
I had two kernels in /boot so I dnf removed those associated with the older
of the two kernels. I then successfully upgraded.
I fear the next time I do a dnf update which includes a new kernel I will
be told, again, that there is not enough space in my /boot partition.

So, how can I increase the size of the /boot partition? Many partitions,
like /tmp, are bigger than they need to be.

Here is what how the /sda disk is organized.
$ lsblk
NAME  MAJ:MIN RM   SIZE RO TYPE  
MOUNTPOINTS

sda 8:0    0 223.6G  0 disk
├─sda1  8:1    0   250M  0 part  /boot
├─sda2  8:2    0 105.5G  0 part
│ └─luks-a2ebb2b0-527d-47f3-83ef-e5908805f31d
│ 253:3    0 105.5G  0 crypt /ssd
├─sda3  8:3    0  97.7G  0 part
│ └─luks-35719a97-5898-4420-9a56-1576ffdc6db3
│ 253:1    0  97.7G  0 crypt /
├─sda4  8:4    0 1K  0 part
├─sda5  8:5    0   9.8G  0 part
│ └─luks-5ee2ed8e-4bdf-43e1-adb0-34a70610a77f
│ 253:2    0   9.8G  0 crypt /tmp
└─sda6  8:6    0   9.8G  0 part
   └─luks-03c06df8-f9b9-4f0d-847e-79a7ed527888
   253:0    0   9.8G  0 crypt [SWAP]

$ df -h
Filesystem  Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/dm-1    96G   22G   70G  25% /
devtmpfs    4.0M 0  4.0M   0% /dev
tmpfs    16G 0   16G   0% /dev/shm
tmpfs   6.3G  1.8M  6.3G   1% /run
/dev/sda1   237M  179M   42M  82% /boot
/dev/dm-2   9.5G  260K  9.0G   1% /tmp
/dev/dm-3   104G  193M   99G   1% /ssd
/dev/dm-4   1.9T  1.2T  630G  66% /home
/dev/dm-5   1.7T  903G  736G  56% /data1
/dev/dm-6    20G   12G  6.9G  63% /var
tmpfs   3.2G  152K  3.2G   1% /run/user/1000


Thanks for any help give.

I realize one way is to backup /home and then reinstall Fedora but
1) that seems like a lot of work and
2) it would mean that the machine in question would then have to
use Wayland rather than Xorg.

Richard


This isn't a direct reply to your question:  IIUC you need to run a 
'live' image to do that.


But I installed f40 a few days ago, and today "dnf upgrade" installed 
kernel-6.8.8 but *not* vmlinuz-6.8.8, so booting failed.


My /boot partition is 450 GB, and I now have two bootable f40 kernels 
and a recent rescue kernel.  There's no room for another.  You probably 
don't have a "recovery" option.


I now have "installonly_limit=2" in /etc/dnf/dnf.conf, but a new "dnf 
upgrade" after that said there was "nothing to do".  What did work was ( 
while running 6.8.7):


sudo dnf remove kernel-core-6.8.8
sudo dnf upgrade

and then when "systemctl list-jobs" was clear, "sudo systemctl reboot"

I, too, would prefer to have a bigger /boot, but this info might help.

John P


--
___
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: Fail2ban is failing

[Richard Shaw]

On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 4:13 PM Patrick O'Callaghan 
wrote:

> On Fri, 2024-05-03 at 13:08 -0400, Tom Rivers via users wrote:
> > Until the fix is available, I've been able to get it running until
> > the
> > next system reboot by doing the following:
> >
> > # setenforce 0
> > # systemctl start fail2ban
> >
> > ... wait a minute ...
> >
> > # setenforce 1
> >
>
> That seems to work. Looks like a problem with SElinux labelling.
>

More or less, basically from what I can tell with F40 that the link from
/var/run->/run for compatibility was dropped and the selinux context in the
fail2ban package needed to be updated (and it was) but my assumption is
that installation of the new package would take care of it.

Thanks,
Richard
--
___
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: Fail2ban is failing

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Fri, 2024-05-03 at 16:52 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
> On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 4:13 PM Patrick O'Callaghan
> 
> wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 2024-05-03 at 13:08 -0400, Tom Rivers via users wrote:
> > > Until the fix is available, I've been able to get it running
> > > until
> > > the
> > > next system reboot by doing the following:
> > > 
> > > # setenforce 0
> > > # systemctl start fail2ban
> > > 
> > > ... wait a minute ...
> > > 
> > > # setenforce 1
> > > 
> > 
> > That seems to work. Looks like a problem with SElinux labelling.
> > 
> 
> More or less, basically from what I can tell with F40 that the link
> from
> /var/run->/run for compatibility was dropped and the selinux context
> in the
> fail2ban package needed to be updated (and it was) but my assumption
> is
> that installation of the new package would take care of it.

# ls -lZ /var/run/fail2ban/fail2ban.sock
srwx--. 1 root root system_u:object_r:var_run_t:s0 0 May  3 22:10 
/var/run/fail2ban/fail2ban.sock

Running restorecon on that (and the directory itself) leaves it
unchanged, so presumably it's incorrect in the database.

poc
--
___
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: can I clone from a usb flash drive to an NVMe drive?

[ToddAndMargo via users]

On 5/2/24 23:34, Todd Chester via users wrote:



On 4/29/24 17:27, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

Hi All,

I am making up a USB flash from of Fedroa 40 MATE for
a customer to play with.

If he likes it, can I clonezilla clone it over
to his brand new NVMe drive (gpart it to expand
the extents)?

-T


It worked !


Here is the weird thing.  I created a full install of FC40 MATE
on a 32 GB stick.  Put a bunch of cool programs on it.  Went to
boot it on the customer's machine and oh holy ...  The bios
was so screwed up that I could only get it to boot once.  After
that, if the stick was at the top of the boot order, I just
got a flashing cursor.  If I removed the stick, got a blank
screen.  It did not roll over to the next in boot order
(W11).   H

The customer came up with an idea.  He has a laptop from
his business that was given to him when he retired.  He
wanted nothing on the laptop.  So in with the stick and
perfect boot.  NO fussing with the BIOS.  Then back down
and in with Clonzilla.  Did a clone over with k2 fill
space and rescue option.  And a perfect clone and all the
space was used with the primary partition.

Will wonder ever cease.

-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

F40 Live image boot failure

[Sam Varshavchik]

With all the talk of Wayland, I followed up on the idea of downloading an  
F40 Live image and seeing if it boots on my existing hardware.


Well, it did boot on two out of three laptops that are currently running F39.

On a 2013-era Thinkpad W520 it immediately fails with a:

error: ../../grub-core/disk/efi/efidisk.c:531:invalid buffer alignment
-1112264040
error: ../../grub-core/loader/i386/efi/linux.c:258:you need to load the  
kernel first.


Press any key to continue...


Although my plans are to use dnf system-upgrade, this looks like a kernel  
issue to me. It is unclear to me whether the issue lies with the Fedora Live  
image, or if there's something on this laptops that just blows the kernel  
from high orbit, whether it'll boot from the USB stick or its existing hard  
drive.


So: would anyone care to put forward an informed opinion?



pgpc5TM7sZJbY.pgp
Description: PGP 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: F40 Live image boot failure

[ToddAndMargo via users]

On 5/3/24 15:42, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
With all the talk of Wayland, I followed up on the idea of downloading 
an F40 Live image and seeing if it boots on my existing hardware.


Well, it did boot on two out of three laptops that are currently running 
F39.


On a 2013-era Thinkpad W520 it immediately fails with a:

error: ../../grub-core/disk/efi/efidisk.c:531:invalid buffer alignment
-1112264040
error: ../../grub-core/loader/i386/efi/linux.c:258:you need to load the 
kernel first.


Press any key to continue...


Although my plans are to use dnf system-upgrade, this looks like a 
kernel issue to me. It is unclear to me whether the issue lies with the 
Fedora Live image, or if there's something on this laptops that just 
blows the kernel from high orbit, whether it'll boot from the USB stick 
or its existing hard drive.


So: would anyone care to put forward an informed opinion?



Try the MATE and XFCe spins and let us know:
https://fedoraproject.org/spins/

MATE is a little bit easier to use

--
___
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: F40 Live image boot failure

[Samuel Sieb]

On 5/3/24 15:42, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
With all the talk of Wayland, I followed up on the idea of downloading 
an F40 Live image and seeing if it boots on my existing hardware.


Well, it did boot on two out of three laptops that are currently running 
F39.


On a 2013-era Thinkpad W520 it immediately fails with a:

error: ../../grub-core/disk/efi/efidisk.c:531:invalid buffer alignment
-1112264040
error: ../../grub-core/loader/i386/efi/linux.c:258:you need to load the 
kernel first.


Press any key to continue...


Although my plans are to use dnf system-upgrade, this looks like a 
kernel issue to me. It is unclear to me whether the issue lies with the 
Fedora Live image, or if there's something on this laptops that just 
blows the kernel from high orbit, whether it'll boot from the USB stick 
or its existing hard drive.


That's a grub error.
--
___
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: F40 Live image boot failure

[Sam Varshavchik]

ToddAndMargo via users writes:


On 5/3/24 15:42, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
With all the talk of Wayland, I followed up on the idea of downloading an  
F40 Live image and seeing if it boots on my existing hardware.


Well, it did boot on two out of three laptops that are currently running F39.

On a 2013-era Thinkpad W520 it immediately fails with a:

error: ../../grub-core/disk/efi/efidisk.c:531:invalid buffer alignment
-1112264040
error: ../../grub-core/loader/i386/efi/linux.c:258:you need to load the  
kernel first.


Press any key to continue...


Although my plans are to use dnf system-upgrade, this looks like a kernel  
issue to me. It is unclear to me whether the issue lies with the Fedora Live  
image, or if there's something on this laptops that just blows the kernel  
from high orbit, whether it'll boot from the USB stick or its existing hard  
drive.


So: would anyone care to put forward an informed opinion?



Try the MATE and XFCe spins and let us know:
https://fedoraproject.org/spins/


That was an XFCE spin Live CD, actually…



pgpnstn2Vwztb.pgp
Description: PGP 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: F40 Live image boot failure

[Sam Varshavchik]

Samuel Sieb writes:


error: ../../grub-core/disk/efi/efidisk.c:531:invalid buffer alignment
-1112264040
error: ../../grub-core/loader/i386/efi/linux.c:258:you need to load the  
kernel first.


Press any key to continue...


Although my plans are to use dnf system-upgrade, this looks like a kernel  
issue to me. It is unclear to me whether the issue lies with the Fedora Live  
image, or if there's something on this laptops that just blows the kernel  
from high orbit, whether it'll boot from the USB stick or its existing hard  
drive.


That's a grub error.


That would have larger repercussions. If it was just a kernel issue I could  
still boot an earlier F39 kernel. But there's only one grub. It's all, or  
nothing.


pgpMdyfiAadkF.pgp
Description: PGP 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: F40 Live image boot failure

[Samuel Sieb]

On 5/3/24 17:26, Sam Varshavchik wrote:

Samuel Sieb writes:


error: ../../grub-core/disk/efi/efidisk.c:531:invalid buffer alignment
-1112264040
error: ../../grub-core/loader/i386/efi/linux.c:258:you need to load 
the kernel first.


Press any key to continue...


Although my plans are to use dnf system-upgrade, this looks like a 
kernel issue to me. It is unclear to me whether the issue lies with 
the Fedora Live image, or if there's something on this laptops that 
just blows the kernel from high orbit, whether it'll boot from the 
USB stick or its existing hard drive.


That's a grub error.


That would have larger repercussions. If it was just a kernel issue I 
could still boot an earlier F39 kernel. But there's only one grub. It's 
all, or nothing.


I expect it's related to how booting is setup from an iso file.  It's 
very unlikely to be an issue with a real drive.

--
___
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: F40 Live image boot failure

[Jeffrey Walton]

On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 8:26 PM Sam Varshavchik 
wrote:

> Samuel Sieb writes:
>
> >> error: ../../grub-core/disk/efi/efidisk.c:531:invalid buffer alignment
> >> -1112264040
> >> error: ../../grub-core/loader/i386/efi/linux.c:258:you need to load
> the
> >> kernel first.
> >>
> >> Press any key to continue...
> >>
> >> Although my plans are to use dnf system-upgrade, this looks like a
> kernel
> >> issue to me. It is unclear to me whether the issue lies with the Fedora
> Live
> >> image, or if there's something on this laptops that just blows the
> kernel
> >> from high orbit, whether it'll boot from the USB stick or its existing
> hard
> >> drive.
> >
> > That's a grub error.
>
> That would have larger repercussions. If it was just a kernel issue I
> could
> still boot an earlier F39 kernel. But there's only one grub. It's all, or
> nothing.
>

I think Samuel is on the right track.

What type of machine is it? BiOS or UEFI? Can you show the output of
`fwupdmgr get-devices`? Does it show a UEFI device, like 'UEFI ESRT
device'? Or is it a BiOS system with a MBR?

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: F40 Live image boot failure

[Sam Varshavchik]

Samuel Sieb writes:


On 5/3/24 17:26, Sam Varshavchik wrote:

Samuel Sieb writes:


error: ../../grub-core/disk/efi/efidisk.c:531:invalid buffer alignment
-1112264040
error: ../../grub-core/loader/i386/efi/linux.c:258:you need to load the  
kernel first.


Press any key to continue...


Although my plans are to use dnf system-upgrade, this looks like a kernel  
issue to me. It is unclear to me whether the issue lies with the Fedora Live  
image, or if there's something on this laptops that just blows the kernel  
from high orbit, whether it'll boot from the USB stick or its existing hard  
drive.


That's a grub error.


That would have larger repercussions. If it was just a kernel issue I could  
still boot an earlier F39 kernel. But there's only one grub. It's all, or  
nothing.


I expect it's related to how booting is setup from an iso file.  It's very  
unlikely to be an issue with a real drive.


It's something with that particular, older hardware, not the iso file.

An old memory resurfaced: I dimly recalled having problems with using USB  
storage devices on the two USB 3.0 ports on that laptop. This was back in  
the days with iffy hardware support on Linux, so it was second nature for me  
to try the third, USB 2.0 port on back of the laptop, and they worked.


So I tried the Live CD on the USB 2.0 port, and it booted.

So, it's ten years later and Linux still has occasional hardware issues, it  
seems…


pgpEwIiFMT6sT.pgp
Description: PGP 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: F40 Live image boot failure

[ToddAndMargo via users]

On 5/3/24 17:24, Sam Varshavchik wrote:

ToddAndMargo via users writes:


On 5/3/24 15:42, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
With all the talk of Wayland, I followed up on the idea of 
downloading an F40 Live image and seeing if it boots on my existing 
hardware.


Well, it did boot on two out of three laptops that are currently 
running F39.


On a 2013-era Thinkpad W520 it immediately fails with a:

error: ../../grub-core/disk/efi/efidisk.c:531:invalid buffer alignment
-1112264040
error: ../../grub-core/loader/i386/efi/linux.c:258:you need to load 
the kernel first.


Press any key to continue...


Although my plans are to use dnf system-upgrade, this looks like a 
kernel issue to me. It is unclear to me whether the issue lies with 
the Fedora Live image, or if there's something on this laptops that 
just blows the kernel from high orbit, whether it'll boot from the 
USB stick or its existing hard drive.


So: would anyone care to put forward an informed opinion?



Try the MATE and XFCe spins and let us know:
https://fedoraproject.org/spins/


That was an XFCE spin Live CD, actually


I use XFCE myself, but go for MATE for new/low
skill users.

This could very well be a BIOS issue.  I hate
those and firmware updates go foobar a lot,
bricking the motherboard.
--
___
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: F40 Live image boot failure

[ToddAndMargo via users]

On 5/3/24 18:28, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

On 5/3/24 17:24, Sam Varshavchik wrote:

ToddAndMargo via users writes:


On 5/3/24 15:42, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
With all the talk of Wayland, I followed up on the idea of 
downloading an F40 Live image and seeing if it boots on my existing 
hardware.


Well, it did boot on two out of three laptops that are currently 
running F39.


On a 2013-era Thinkpad W520 it immediately fails with a:

error: ../../grub-core/disk/efi/efidisk.c:531:invalid buffer alignment
-1112264040
error: ../../grub-core/loader/i386/efi/linux.c:258:you need to load 
the kernel first.


Press any key to continue...


Although my plans are to use dnf system-upgrade, this looks like a 
kernel issue to me. It is unclear to me whether the issue lies with 
the Fedora Live image, or if there's something on this laptops that 
just blows the kernel from high orbit, whether it'll boot from the 
USB stick or its existing hard drive.


So: would anyone care to put forward an informed opinion?



Try the MATE and XFCe spins and let us know:
https://fedoraproject.org/spins/


That was an XFCE spin Live CD, actually


I use XFCE myself, but go for MATE for new/low
skill users.

This could very well be a BIOS issue.  I hate
those and firmware updates go foobar a lot,
bricking the motherboard.


Try popping the BIOS into LEGACY boot

--
___
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: F40 Live image boot failure

[Samuel Sieb]

On 5/3/24 6:03 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:

Samuel Sieb writes:


On 5/3/24 17:26, Sam Varshavchik wrote:

Samuel Sieb writes:


error: ../../grub-core/disk/efi/efidisk.c:531:invalid buffer alignment
-1112264040
error: ../../grub-core/loader/i386/efi/linux.c:258:you need to load 
the kernel first.


Press any key to continue...


Although my plans are to use dnf system-upgrade, this looks like a 
kernel issue to me. It is unclear to me whether the issue lies with 
the Fedora Live image, or if there's something on this laptops that 
just blows the kernel from high orbit, whether it'll boot from the 
USB stick or its existing hard drive.


That's a grub error.


That would have larger repercussions. If it was just a kernel issue I 
could still boot an earlier F39 kernel. But there's only one grub. 
It's all, or nothing.


I expect it's related to how booting is setup from an iso file.  It's 
very unlikely to be an issue with a real drive.


It's something with that particular, older hardware, not the iso file.

An old memory resurfaced: I dimly recalled having problems with using 
USB storage devices on the two USB 3.0 ports on that laptop. This was 
back in the days with iffy hardware support on Linux, so it was second 
nature for me to try the third, USB 2.0 port on back of the laptop, and 
they worked.


So I tried the Live CD on the USB 2.0 port, and it booted.

So, it's ten years later and Linux still has occasional hardware issues, 
it seems…


Again, not Linux.  That's grub and most likely a bios issue.  EFI 
support on older hardware wasn't the best.

--
___
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