Re: Re-install Fedora without destroying user data

[CLOSE Dave]

I wrote:

> Well, not so fast. suomi's example did not involve LVM but LVM is
> the default for Fedora. Trying to follow the example and adjusting
> for LVM doesn't work for me. With these kickstart commands,
> 
>  bootloader --driveorder=sda --location=mbr --boot-drive=sda
>  clearpart --none --initlabel
>  part /boot --fstype=ext4 --size=500 --onpart=sda
>  part pv.01 --noformat --onpart=sda
>  volgroup vg_test1 pv.01 --noformat
>  logvol /home --noformat --name=lv_home --vgname=vg_test1
>  logvol / --useexisting --name=lv_root --vgname=vg_test1
>  logvol swap --useexisting --name=lv_swap --vgname=vg_test1
> 
> installation fails with the message, "Members may not be specified
> for preexisting volgroup".

Found my error. The following commands work:

 bootloader --driveorder=sda --location=mbr --boot-drive=sda
 clearpart --none --initlabel
 part /boot --fstype=ext4 --size=500 --onpart=sda1
 part pv.01 --noformat --onpart=sda2
 volgroup vg_test1 --noformat
 logvol /home --noformat --name=lv_home --vgname=vg_test1
 logvol / --useexisting --name=lv_root --vgname=vg_test1
 logvol swap --useexisting --name=lv_swap --vgname=vg_test1

Basically, onpart needed the partition number, not just the disk name. I
also omitted pv.01 from volgroup but not sure if that was necessary.
-- 
Dave Close
___
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

Re: Re-install Fedora without destroying user data

[CLOSE Dave]

suomi () wrote:

> as far as possible I do the installation(s) using a kickstart file.
> It is not possible, when you install from a Live CD.
> My disk-partitionning in the kickstasrt file looks like:
>
> # System bootloader configuration
> bootloader --location=mbr --boot-drive=nvme0n1
> # Partition clearing information
> clearpart --none --initlabel
> # Disk partitioning information
> part swap --fstype="swap" --onpart=nvme0n1p3
> part /home --fstype="ext4" --onpart=nvme0n1p4 --noformat
> part / --fstype="ext4" --onpart=nvme0n1p2
> part /boot/efi --fstype="vfat" --onpart=nvme0n1p1

I responded:

> Thank you. That is precisely the example I needed. This really should be
> in some kind of help file for Fedora.

Well, not so fast. suomi's example did not involve LVM but LVM is the
default for Fedora. Trying to follow the example and adjusting for LVM
doesn't work for me. With these kickstart commands,

 bootloader --driveorder=sda --location=mbr --boot-drive=sda
 clearpart --none --initlabel
 part /boot --fstype=ext4 --size=500 --onpart=sda
 part pv.01 --noformat --onpart=sda
 volgroup vg_test1 pv.01 --noformat
 logvol /home --noformat --name=lv_home --vgname=vg_test1
 logvol / --useexisting --name=lv_root --vgname=vg_test1
 logvol swap --useexisting --name=lv_swap --vgname=vg_test1

installation fails with the message, "Members may not be specified for
preexisting volgroup".

I'm not sure to what "members" refers in that message. If I change the
volgroup line to omit "pv.01", installation fails saying, 'Volume group
"vg_test1" given in volgroup command does not exist.' If "members" means
the logvol lines, then where can I specify noformat for /home? (And
checking /dev/mapper via TTY2 shows that the volgroup does exist, though
it wasn't activated.)
-- 
Dave Close
___
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

Re: Re-install Fedora without destroying user data

[CLOSE Dave]

suomi () wrote:

> as far as possible I do the installation(s) using a kickstart file.
> It is not possible, when you install from a Live CD.
> My disk-partitionning in the kickstasrt file looks like:
> 
> # System bootloader configuration
> bootloader --location=mbr --boot-drive=nvme0n1
> # Partition clearing information
> clearpart --none --initlabel
> # Disk partitioning information
> part swap --fstype="swap" --onpart=nvme0n1p3
> part /home --fstype="ext4" --onpart=nvme0n1p4 --noformat
> part / --fstype="ext4" --onpart=nvme0n1p2
> part /boot/efi --fstype="vfat" --onpart=nvme0n1p1

Thank you. That is precisely the example I needed. This really should be
in some kind of help file for Fedora.
-- 
Dave Close
___
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

Re-install Fedora without destroying user data

[CLOSE Dave]

On a default Fedora installation with a sufficiently large disk, /home
is a separate filesystem and should not contain any required system
files. Thus it ought to be possible to completely re-install Fedora, the
same version as was previously installed, without over-writing /home.
I'd like to do this with kickstart, if possible. I think Anaconda offers
enough options but I find the documentation a bit confusing for this
purpose. Is anyone aware of an online reference describing how to do this?
-- 
Dave Close
___
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

Re: F29 to F30 VMware upgrade

[CLOSE Dave]

Chris Murphy wrote:

> We'd need to look at LBA 0 on a broken system to do an autopsy. Once
> it's fixed, the evidence of what stepped on it is wiped away.

I have two more systems to upgrade, probably next week. If one of them
fails in the same way, I'll capture the MBR and post here.
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

F30 Zabbix

[CLOSE Dave]

On F30, zabbix-agent requires "zabbix = 4.0.7-2.fc30" but zabbix
provides "zabbix = 1:4.0.7-2.fc30". The result is that DNF will not
update either.
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F29 to F30 VMware upgrade

[CLOSE Dave]

Chris Murphy wrote:

> Not sure what would corrupt it but there is competition for LBA 0,
> the MBR, in that there's a bootloader portion in the first ~440 bytes
> and then a partition table from that point until the 512th byte. So 
> whenever something changes a partition or a boot flag (active bit)
> or bootloader jump code, there's a risk. This was such a well known 
> problem it directly affected GPT. For one, don't use LBA 0. Two,
> make two copies in two totally different locations. Three, checksum 
> everything. Four, give the bootloader its own home, no sharing.

Interesting advice but it leaves me without a course of action. How does
one avoid using LBA 0? Doesn't the boot loader already have its own
location?
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

F30 createrepo

[CLOSE Dave]

In previous installations, /usr/bin/createrepo was a symbolic link to
/usr/bin/createrepo_c. Now with createrepo_c-0.14.1-1.fc30.x86_64, that
link is no longer created. This disrupts lots of scripts and will force
changes to a lot of documentation, including Fedora's own online.
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

F29 to F30 VMware upgrade

[CLOSE Dave]

I have upgraded three VMware images previously running Fedora 29 to
Fedora 30 using system-upgrade. All the images are running on the same
ESC hardware and, so far as I know, use the same VMware foundation. The
first worked flawlessly. Both the second and third failed in exactly the
same way: they failed to reboot successfully after the upgrade.

When the reboot occurred, VMware reported a "alloc magic" error
immediately and froze. Not being a VMware expert, I referred the issue
to someone who is and he discovered that the MBR, master boot record, on
the image was corrupt. After installing a new MBR, the system booted and
the upgrade showed no further problems.

While investigating, we were sidetracked by the content of grub.cfg. It
appears that grub no longer includes a section for each possible system
to be booted. Not seeing any, we thought grub.cfg was corrupt also. But
that is apparently not the case. After the MBR fix, the generated
grub.cfg works properly.
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Resilient network configuration

[CLOSE Dave]

Samuel Sieb wrote:

> I just tried it and it worked.  I was able to add a static address to
> my wifi connection while keeping the dhcp one.
> "nm-connection-editor" has to be run from the command line, there is
> no icon for it.  The Gnome connection editor doesn't support doing
> this.

Perhaps there is a difference depending on the Fedora version. I'm
trying to apply this to an older release (which I'm not allowed to
upgrade). Since it worked for you, can you tell me what changes were
made to the configuration files. I'm happy to do this manually.
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Resilient network configuration

[CLOSE Dave]

I wrote:

> For a primary interface with a static address, I may be able to add
> the information as IPADDR2 (etc) in ifcfg-eth0. But how do I do this
> if the primary interface gets its address via DHCP?

Samuel Sieb answered:

> Install "nm-connection-editor".  It gives you a lot more
> capabilities, including doing that.

I've tried that and it doesn't. When the connection method is DHCP, the
additional address area is grayed out.
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Resilient network configuration

[CLOSE Dave]

On every version of Fedora in the last ten years or so, the basic
network configuration is stored in files under /etc/sysconfig. When the
machine boots or I run "systemctl restart network" (or "service network
restart"), those files determine how the network gets set-up. After
that, I can change the configuration with several tools. For example, I
can run something like,

 # ip address add 192.168.0.37/24 dev eth0 label eth0:xx

and a new interface alias will be created. But how do I make this alias
resilient so that it will appear automatically after a boot or a network
restart?

For a primary interface with a static address, I may be able to add the
information as IPADDR2 (etc) in ifcfg-eth0. But how do I do this if the
primary interface gets its address via DHCP?
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Using rsync to get the Fedora repositories

[CLOSE Dave]

Yesterday, I wrote:

> I have a script that uses rsync to pull the Fedora repositories
> nightly. If I run it manually, it works flawlessly. But if it runs
> via cron, I get an error on all the Fedora 28 repositories. I do not
> get the error on Fedora 27 or RPMFusion 27 or 28 repositories. The
> script sets timeout values to 3600 seconds but fails in only a few
> seconds. (I haven't started to sync F29 repos yet.)
> 
> The error message is,
> 
>   rsync: safe_read failed to read 1 bytes [Receiver]: Connection 
> reset by peer (104)
>   rsync error: error in rsync protocol data stream (code 12) at
> io.c(276) [Receiver=3.1.3]
> 
> The commands in the script are,
> 
>   # cat mirror
>   #!/bin/sh
>   /root/bin/mirror-fedora-27
>   /root/bin/mirror-fedora-28
>   /root/bin/mirror-rpmfusion-27
>   /root/bin/mirror-rpmfusion-28

Just for the heck of it, I changed this script last night to reverse the
order of the first two subordinate scripts:

  # cat mirror
  #!/bin/sh
  /root/bin/mirror-fedora-28
  /root/bin/mirror-fedora-27
  /root/bin/mirror-rpmfusion-27
  /root/bin/mirror-rpmfusion-28

And the problem changed. Now it was the F27 updates which failed with
the error above. (And, yes, I know F27 is no longer being updated so,
even if it worked, there shouldn't have been any updates loaded.)

And the F27 subordinate script is,

  # cat mirror-fedora-27
  #!/bin/sh
  opt="-aHv --timeout=3600 --contimeout=3600 --exclude=repoview/**"
  opt+=" --usermap=:apache --groupmap=:apache --exclude=0ad-*"
  opt+=" --exclude=/*/armhfp/** --exclude=debug/**"
  opt+=" --exclude=repoview/** --exclude=*.html"
  opt+=" --exclude=/*/SRPMS/**  --delete-excluded"
  src="rsync://mirrors.kernel.org/fedora"
  dst="/var/www/html/pub/fedora/linux"
  r="releases"; u="updates"; s="Server"; e="Everything"; w="Workstation"
  doit () {
mkdir -p $dst/$3
rsync $opt $src/$2 $dst/$3
  }
  doit "$e x86_64" $r/27/$e/x86_64/os/ $r/27/$e/x86_64/os
  doit "$s x86_64" $r/27/$s/x86_64/os/ $r/27/$s/x86_64/os
  doit "$w x86_64" $r/27/$w/x86_64/os/ $r/27/$w/x86_64/os
  doit "$u x86_64" $u/27/$e/x86_64/$u/27/$e/x86_64/os

Other scripts are similar with the obvious substitutions.

Note that, even after the failures in the F27 updates last night or the
F28 updates previously, the RPMFusion updates did not fail.
-- 
Dave Close, Thales InFlyt Experience, Irvine California USA.
cell +1 949 394 2124, dave.cl...@us.thalesgroup.com

 "Learn from the mistakes of others.
  You can never live long enough to make them all yourself."
--Groucho Marx
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Using rsync to get the Fedora repositories

[CLOSE Dave]

Rick Stevens wrote:

> Running interactively but not under cron usually indicates that you've
> forgotten that running under cron, you don't have the same environment
> as you do in an interactive session. So, make sure your environment is
> set correctly in the script (such as the PATH and such).

Thanks for the reply, Rick. I'm certainly aware of the issue. But note
that I have four nearly identical sub-scripts, three of which work
flawlessly and one of which reports the error only under cron. The error
message seems network related, not environment related, though I don't
know for sure what the error means.

  rsync: safe_read failed to read 1 bytes [Receiver]: Connection reset
by peer (104)
  rsync error: error in rsync protocol data stream (code 12) at
io.c(276) [Receiver=3.1.3]

The only online reference I could find to that message suggested
possible missing directories. But the scripts all use absolute pathnames
and all of them do exist.
-- 
  Dave Close

 "Learn from the mistakes of others.
  You can never live long enough to make them all yourself."
--Groucho Marx
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Using rsync to get the Fedora repositories

[CLOSE Dave]

I have a script that uses rsync to pull the Fedora repositories nightly.
If I run it manually, it works flawlessly. But if it runs via cron, I
get an error on all the Fedora 28 repositories. I do not get the error
on Fedora 27 or RPMFusion 27 or 28 repositories. The script sets timeout
values to 3600 seconds but fails in only a few seconds. (I haven't
started to sync F29 repos yet.)

The error message is,

  rsync: safe_read failed to read 1 bytes [Receiver]: Connection reset
by peer (104)
  rsync error: error in rsync protocol data stream (code 12) at
io.c(276) [Receiver=3.1.3]

The commands in the script are,

  # cat mirror
  #!/bin/sh
  /root/bin/mirror-fedora-27
  /root/bin/mirror-fedora-28
  /root/bin/mirror-rpmfusion-27
  /root/bin/mirror-rpmfusion-28

And the F28 subordinate script is,

  # cat mirror-fedora-28
  #!/bin/sh
  opt="-aHv --timeout=3600 --contimeout=3600 --exclude=repoview/**"
  opt+=" --usermap=:apache --groupmap=:apache --exclude=0ad-*"
  opt+=" --exclude=/*/armhfp/** --exclude=debug/**"
  opt+=" --exclude=repoview/** --exclude=*.html"
  opt+=" --exclude=/*/SRPMS/**  --delete-excluded"
  src="rsync://mirrors.kernel.org/fedora"
  dst="/var/www/html/pub/fedora/linux"
  r="releases"; u="updates"; s="Server"; e="Everything"; w="Workstation"
  doit () {
mkdir -p $dst/$3
rsync $opt $src/$2 $dst/$3
  }
  doit "$e x86_64" $r/28/$e/x86_64/os/ $r/28/$e/x86_64/os
  doit "$s x86_64" $r/28/$s/x86_64/os/ $r/28/$s/x86_64/os
  doit "$w x86_64" $r/28/$w/x86_64/os/ $r/28/$w/x86_64/os
  doit "$u x86_64" $u/28/$e/x86_64/$u/28/$e/x86_64/os

Other scripts are similar with the obvious substitutions.
-- 
  Dave Close

 "Learn from the mistakes of others.
  You can never live long enough to make them all yourself."
--Groucho Marx
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Excessive dependency

[CLOSE Dave]

Samuel Sieb wrote:

> If you want 52.9 for F28, then you can get it from here:
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1104472
> 
> Then use versionlock or excludes to stop it from upgrading.

Thank you! That is exactly what I needed.

Now I have to figure out how to re-enable the add-ons that TB 60 disabled...
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Excessive dependency

[CLOSE Dave]

Ed Greshko wrote:

> You're running F28 and trying to downgrade to packages in F27.
> Basically trying to run a Franken version of Fedora.
> 
> That is not something that is supported.

I'm only trying to run an older version of Thunderbird. It's the
dependencies that are killing me.
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Excessive dependency

[CLOSE Dave]

stan wrote:

> Run this as
> # dnf -x libreoffice\* --best --allowerasing --enablerepo=fedora27
> --enablerepo=updates27 downgrade  thunderbird-52.9.1-1.fc27.x86_64
> 
> and it should point to the dependency of libreoffice you want to
> downgrade that causes it to be erased.
> ...
> It is probably one of the other above packages that libreoffice has a
> later dependency on, say hunspell.  In order to downgrade it,
> libreoffice has to be erased.

Error:
 Problem: package libreoffice-core-1:6.0.6.2-1.fc28.x86_64 requires
libhunspell-1.6.so.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
  - cannot install both hunspell-1.5.4-4.fc27.x86_64 and
hunspell-1.6.2-1.fc28.x86_64
  - package thunderbird-52.9.1-1.fc27.x86_64 requires
libhunspell-1.5.so.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
  - conflicting requests
  - problem with installed package libreoffice-core-1:6.0.6.2-1.fc28.x86_64

Trying to downgrade everything at once still seems excessive:

# dnf --allowerasing --enablerepo=fedora27 --enablerepo=updates27
downgrade hunspell-1.5.4-4.fc27.x86_64
dnf --allowerasing --enablerepo=fedora27 --enablerepo=updates27
downgrade hunspell-1.5.4-4.fc27.x86_64
libreoffice-base-5.4.7.2-3.fc27.x86_64
libreoffice-calc-5.4.7.2-3.fc27.x86_64
libreoffice-core-5.4.7.2-3.fc27.x86_64
libreoffice-draw-5.4.7.2-3.fc27.x86_64
libreoffice-emailmerge-5.4.7.2-3.fc27.x86_64
libreoffice-graphicfilter-5.4.7.2-3.fc27.x86_64
libreoffice-gtk2-5.4.7.2-3.fc27.x86_64
libreoffice-gtk3-5.4.7.2-3.fc27.x86_64
libreoffice-help-en-5.4.7.2-3.fc27.x86_64
libreoffice-impress-5.4.7.2-3.fc27.x86_64
libreoffice-langpack-en-5.4.7.2-3.fc27.x86_64
libreoffice-math-5.4.7.2-3.fc27.x86_64
libreoffice-ogltrans-5.4.7.2-3.fc27.x86_64
libreoffice-pdfimport-5.4.7.2-3.fc27.x86_64
libreoffice-pyuno-5.4.7.2-3.fc27.x86_64
libreoffice-writer-5.4.7.2-3.fc27.x86_64
libreoffice-x11-5.4.7.2-3.fc27.x86_64
libreoffice-xsltfilter-5.4.7.2-3.fc27.x86_64
thunderbird-52.9.1-1.fc27.x86_64
Last metadata expiration check: 0:00:00 ago on Tue 23 Oct 2018 01:30:24
PM PDT.
Dependencies resolved.

 Package  Arch   VersionRepository

  Size

Installing dependencies:
 boost-python x86_64 1.64.0-7.fc27
updates27 129 k
 caribou  x86_64 0.4.21-10.fc28 updates
 161 k
 caribou-gtk2-module  x86_64 0.4.21-10.fc28 updates
  27 k
 caribou-gtk3-module  x86_64 0.4.21-10.fc28 updates
  27 k
 compat-giflibx86_64 4.1.6-1.fc28   fedora
  26 k
 compat-libical2  x86_64 2.0.0-3.fc28   fedora
 211 k
 compat-xerces-c31x86_64 3.1.4-1.fc28   fedora
 963 k
 control-center   x86_64 1:3.26.2-2.fc27
updates27 4.5 M
 control-center-filesystemx86_64 1:3.26.2-2.fc27
updates27  26 k
 gdal-python  x86_64 2.1.4-6.1.fc27
updates27 550 k
 gwenhywfar-gui-gtk2  x86_64 4.15.3-9.fc27
updates27  41 k
 pulseaudio-gdm-hooks x86_64 12.2-1.fc27
updates27  22 k
 python3-caribou  noarch 0.4.21-10.fc28 updates
  51 k
 texlive-luatex-bin   x86_64 6:svn41091-36.20160520.fc27.5
fedora27
 3.3 M
 texlive-pdftex-bin   x86_64 6:svn40987-36.20160520.fc27.5
fedora27
 396 k
 texlive-pdftex-doc   noarch 6:svn41149-42.fc28.2   fedora
 1.5 M
 texlive-xetex-binx86_64 6:svn41091-36.20160520.fc27.5
fedora27
 629 k
Removing dependent packages:
 boost-python2x86_64 1.66.0-8.fc28  @updates
 301 k
 gnome-control-center x86_64 3.28.2-1.fc28  @updates
  19 M
 gnome-control-center-filesystem  noarch 3.28.2-1.fc28  @updates
   0
 gwenhywfar-gui-gtk3  x86_64 4.20.0-2.fc28  @fedora
 101 k
 python2-gdal x86_64 2.2.4-3.fc28   @updates
 3.5 M
 xdg-desktop-portal-kde   x86_64 5.13.5-1.fc28  @updates
 497 k
Downgrading:
 CGAL x86_64 4.11.1-1.fc27
updates27 441 k
 abrt x86_64 2.10.7-1.fc27
updates27 525 k
 abrt-addon-ccpp  x86_64 2.10.7-1.fc27
updates27 130 k
 abrt-addon-coredump-helper   x86_64 2.10.7-1.fc27
updates27  40 k
 abrt-addon-kerneloopsx86_64 2.10.7-1.fc27
updates27  54 k
 abrt-addon-pstoreoopsx86_64 2.10.7-1.fc27
updates27  32 k
 abrt-addon-vmcorex86_64 2.10.7-1.fc27
updates27  44 k
 abrt-addon-xorg  x86_64 2.10.7-1.fc27
updates27  46 k
 abrt-cli x86_64 2.10.7-1.fc27
updates

Re: Excessive dependency

[CLOSE Dave]

Samuel Sieb wrote:

>> After upgrading FC27 to FC28 (x86_64), Thunderbird became very
>> unreliable and useful extensions stopped working. I decided to take the
>> easy solution and just downgrade Thunderbird back to what I had with
>> FC27. But for some reason, DNF thinks OpenOffice is dependent on
>> Thunderbird, and deletes it! It certainly shouldn't be dependent!
> 
> The output from dnf would be useful.

Here you go. (Repos fedora27 and updates27 are local mirrors of the FC27
repos.

# dnf --allowerasing --enablerepo=fedora27 --enablerepo=updates27
downgrade  thunderbird-52.9.1-1.fc27.x86_64
Last metadata expiration check: 0:00:00 ago on Tue 23 Oct 2018 12:32:34
PM PDT.
Dependencies resolved.

 Package  Arch  Version  Repository
  Size

Removing dependent packages:
 libreoffice-base x86_641:6.0.6.2-1.fc28 @updates
 5.9 M
 libreoffice-calc x86_641:6.0.6.2-1.fc28 @updates
  31 M
 libreoffice-core x86_641:6.0.6.2-1.fc28 @updates
 247 M
 libreoffice-draw x86_641:6.0.6.2-1.fc28 @updates
  65 k
 libreoffice-emailmerge   x86_641:6.0.6.2-1.fc28 @updates
  54 k
 libreoffice-graphicfilterx86_641:6.0.6.2-1.fc28 @updates
 1.5 M
 libreoffice-gtk2 x86_641:6.0.6.2-1.fc28 @updates
 674 k
 libreoffice-gtk3 x86_641:6.0.6.2-1.fc28 @updates
 775 k
 libreoffice-help-en  x86_641:6.0.6.2-1.fc28 @updates
  24 M
 libreoffice-impress  x86_641:6.0.6.2-1.fc28 @updates
 2.1 M
 libreoffice-langpack-en  x86_641:6.0.6.2-1.fc28 @updates
 187 k
 libreoffice-math x86_641:6.0.6.2-1.fc28 @updates
 1.7 M
 libreoffice-ogltrans x86_641:6.0.6.2-1.fc28 @updates
 290 k
 libreoffice-pdfimportx86_641:6.0.6.2-1.fc28 @updates
 598 k
 libreoffice-pyunox86_641:6.0.6.2-1.fc28 @updates
 1.5 M
 libreoffice-writer   x86_641:6.0.6.2-1.fc28 @updates
  16 M
 libreoffice-x11  x86_641:6.0.6.2-1.fc28 @updates
 706 k
 libreoffice-xsltfilter   x86_641:6.0.6.2-1.fc28 @updates
 4.3 M
Downgrading:
 enchant  x86_641:1.6.0-18.fc27  fedora27
  61 k
 enchant-develx86_641:1.6.0-18.fc27  fedora27
  17 k
 enchant2 x86_642.2.3-4.fc27 updates27
  58 k
 hunspell x86_641.5.4-4.fc27 fedora27
 328 k
 hunspell-devel   x86_641.5.4-4.fc27 fedora27
  98 k
 kf5-sonnet-core  x86_645.48.0-2.fc27updates27
 167 k
 kf5-sonnet-uix86_645.48.0-2.fc27updates27
 152 k
 link-grammar x86_645.5.1-4.fc27 updates27
 2.1 M
 lokalize x86_6417.12.1-1.fc27   updates27
 2.6 M
 scribus  x86_641.4.6-9.fc27 fedora27
  21 M
 thunderbird  x86_6452.9.1-1.fc27updates27
  79 M

Transaction Summary

Remove 18 Packages
Downgrade  11 Packages

Total download size: 106 M

> Also, thunderbird seems to be working fine for me on F28, but I don't
> use any extensions.

Seems to die frequently with errors like, "Process 20905 (thunderbird)
crashed in g_wakeup_new()". External editor extension does not work. I
strongly dislike any program that thinks I should use their own editor
and learn still another way to edit things.
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Excessive dependency

[CLOSE Dave]

After upgrading FC27 to FC28 (x86_64), Thunderbird became very
unreliable and useful extensions stopped working. I decided to take the
easy solution and just downgrade Thunderbird back to what I had with
FC27. But for some reason, DNF thinks OpenOffice is dependent on
Thunderbird, and deletes it! It certainly shouldn't be dependent!
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Kernel installed in wrong location

[CLOSE Dave]

Ed Greshko wrote:

> I have tested this in a VM and verified the failure.  There is one
> exception.  If the /boot directory does not contain a directory with
> the name of the "machine-id" then the upgrade will be successful.
> 
> Will you be writing up the BZ?

Bug 1559118.
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Kernel installed in wrong location

[CLOSE Dave]

Greshko wrote:

>> I think I found the problem. Comparing packages installed on this 
>> problem machine with others, I noticed that grubby was not 
>> installed. After installing it and then re-installing the kernel,
>> I find the kernel in /boot where it belongs.
>> 
>> Evidently, something isn't checking dependencies sufficiently. I 
>> saw no error messages indicating anything was missing.

> If that turns out to be the case, and if things on that machine used 
> to work, it would be interesting to know if/when grubby was removed.

Too long ago to still be in my /var/log/dnf* logs. Evidently, some time
after kernel 4.14.11-300.fc27.x86_64 as that was the last one properly
placed in /boot.

> Also, if it fails with grubby out it sounds like a very good 
> bugzilla.

True.
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Kernel installed in wrong location

[CLOSE Dave]

I think I found the problem. Comparing packages installed on this
problem machine with others, I noticed that grubby was not installed.
After installing it and then re-installing the kernel, I find the kernel
in /boot where it belongs.

Evidently, something isn't checking dependencies sufficiently. I saw no
error messages indicating anything was missing.
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Kernel installed in wrong location

[CLOSE Dave]

Ed Greshko wrote:

>> It seems clear that some script or scriptlet in the package is not doing
>> its job. But they seem pretty simple and I don't see any dependencies
>> which would make them fail on this machine and not others.

> That would seem to be a fair conclusion. 
> 
> I think I would look at the kernel-install script a bit more.  It seems it 
> may be
> calling the scripts in /usr/lib/kernel/install.d

All of these scripts, /bin/kernel-install and
/usr/lib/kernel/install.d/*, are identical on this problem machine with
those on several other local machines which are not having this problem.
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Kernel installed in wrong location

[CLOSE Dave]

Roger Heflin wrote:

> I would run this and see where rpm thinks they should be since they
> are not in /boot
>  rpm -qa --filesbypkg | grep -i vmlinuz

Evidently, RPM thinks they should be in /boot (as I would expect):

> $ rpm -qa --filesbypkg | grep -i vmlinuz
> kernel-core  /boot/.vmlinuz-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64.hmac
> kernel-core  /boot/vmlinuz-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64
> kernel-core  /lib/modules/4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64/.vmlinuz.hmac
> kernel-core  /lib/modules/4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64/vmlinuz
> kernel-core  /boot/.vmlinuz-4.14.11-300.fc27.x86_64.hmac
> kernel-core  /boot/vmlinuz-4.14.11-300.fc27.x86_64
> kernel-core  /lib/modules/4.14.11-300.fc27.x86_64/.vmlinuz.hmac
> kernel-core  /lib/modules/4.14.11-300.fc27.x86_64/vmlinuz
> kernel-core  /boot/.vmlinuz-4.15.8-300.fc27.x86_64.hmac
> kernel-core  /boot/vmlinuz-4.15.8-300.fc27.x86_64
> kernel-core  /lib/modules/4.15.8-300.fc27.x86_64/.vmlinuz.hmac
> kernel-core  /lib/modules/4.15.8-300.fc27.x86_64/vmlinuz
-- 
Dave Close, Thales InFlyt Experience, Irvine California USA.
cell +1 949 394 2124, dave.cl...@us.thalesgroup.com

 "1800: Joseph Marie Jacquard teaches a loom to read punch cards,
  creating the first heavily multi-threaded processing unit."
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Kernel installed in wrong location

[CLOSE Dave]

The following procedure did NOT fix my problem. Using RPM instead of DNF
still did not install the new kernel in /boot.

Note, the new kernel is not in /boot when I start.

> # ls /boot
> 7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b
> config-4.14.11-300.fc27.x86_64
> efi
> extlinux
> grub2
> initramfs-0-rescue-7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b.img
> initramfs-4.14.11-300.fc27.x86_64.img
> initrd-plymouth.img
> loader
> lost+found
> System.map-4.14.11-300.fc27.x86_64
> vmlinuz-0-rescue-7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b
> vmlinuz-4.14.11-300.fc27.x86_64

RPM won't install the new kernel since it is already installed.

> # mkdir temp
> # cd temp
> # dnf download kernel-core-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64
> # rpm -ivh kernel-core-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64
> Preparing...  # [100%]
>package kernel-core-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64 is already installed

Get the rescue directory out of the way. Remove the new kernel completely.

> # mv /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b /tmp
> # dnf -y remove kernel*-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64
> Removing:
>  kernel   x86_64 4.15.9-300.fc27 @updates   0
>  kernel-core  x86_64 4.15.9-300.fc27 @updates  58 
> M
>  kernel-devel x86_64 4.15.9-300.fc27 @updates  48 
> M
>  kernel-headers   x86_64 4.15.9-300.fc27 @updates 4.3 
> M
>  kernel-modules   x86_64 4.15.9-300.fc27 @updates  26 
> M
>  kernel-modules-extra x86_64 4.15.9-300.fc27 @updates 2.1 
> M
> Removing dependent packages:
>  gcc  x86_64 7.3.1-5.fc27@updates  52 
> M
>  gcc-c++  x86_64 7.3.1-5.fc27@updates  27 
> M
>  gcc-gdb-plugin   x86_64 7.3.1-5.fc27@updates 316 
> k
>  glibc-devel  x86_64 2.26-27.fc27@updates 1.1 
> M
>  glibc-headersx86_64 2.26-27.fc27@updates 2.2 
> M
>  libtool  x86_64 2.4.6-20.fc27   @fedora  2.6 
> M
>  pocl x86_64 0.15-0.1.20171023git53ef5e8.fc27@updates 222 
> M
> Removing unused dependencies:
>  hwloc-libs   x86_64 1.11.5-6.fc27   @fedora  2.1 
> M
>  isl  x86_64 0.16.1-3.fc27   @fedora  2.9 
> M
>  libstdc++-devel  x86_64 7.3.1-5.fc27@updates  10 
> M

Try to install the new kernel using RPM.

> # dnf download gcc-7.3.1-5.fc27.x86_64 \
>   gcc-c++-7.3.1-5.fc27.x86_64 \
>   gcc-gdb-plugin-7.3.1-5.fc27.x86_64 \
>   glibc-devel-2.26-27.fc27.x86_64 \
>   glibc-headers-2.26-27.fc27.x86_64 \
>   hwloc-libs-1.11.5-6.fc27.x86_64 \
>   isl-0.16.1-3.fc27.x86_64 \
>   kernel-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64 \
>   kernel-devel-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64 \
>   kernel-headers-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64 \
>   kernel-modules-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64 \
>   kernel-modules-extra-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64 \
>   libstdc++-devel-7.3.1-5.fc27.x86_64 \
>   libtool-2.4.6-20.fc27.x86_64 \
>   pocl-0.15-0.1.20171023git53ef5e8.fc27.x86_64
> # rpm -ivh *
> Preparing...  # [100%]
> Updating / installing...
>1:kernel-core-4.15.9-300.fc27  # [  6%]
>2:kernel-modules-4.15.9-300.fc27   # [ 13%]
>3:libstdc++-devel-7.3.1-5.fc27 # [ 19%]
>4:kernel-headers-4.15.9-300.fc27   # [ 25%]
>5:glibc-headers-2.26-27.fc27   # [ 31%]
>6:glibc-devel-2.26-27.fc27 # [ 38%]
>7:isl-0.16.1-3.fc27# [ 44%]
>8:gcc-7.3.1-5.fc27 # [ 50%]
>9:hwloc-libs-1.11.5-6.fc27 # [ 56%]
>   10:pocl-0.15-0.1.20171023git53ef5e8.# [ 63%]
>   11:gcc-c++-7.3.1-5.fc27 # [ 69%]
>   12:gcc-gdb-plugin-7.3.1-5.fc27  # [ 75%]
>   13:libtool-2.4.6-20.fc27# [ 81%]
>   14:kernel-4.15.9-300.fc27   # [ 88%]
>   15:kernel-modules-extra-4.15.9-300.f# [ 94%]
>   16:kernel-devel-4.15.9-300.fc27 # [100%]
> cat: write error: Broken pipe
> Running as unit: run-rff037a106b224379a6a6288281705dcb.service

The new kernel is still not in /boot. The rescue directory has returned.

> # ls /boot
> 7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b
> config-4.14.11-300.fc27.x86_64
> efi
> extlinux
> grub2
> initramfs-0-rescue-7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b.img
> initramfs-4.14.11-300.fc27.x86_64.img

Re: Kernel installed in wrong location

[CLOSE Dave]

Ed Greshko wrote:

>>> All of those directories are empty, yes?
>> Most, but not all:
>>
>>> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.15.8-300.fc27.x86_64:
>>> initrd  linux
>>> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64:
>>> initrd  linux
> 
> 
> I get the feeling, based on the name of the directory and most of 
> them being empty, that these are just "temporary" directories that
> are just not getting deleted for some reason.  I doubt there would be
> any problem to delete them.

Thanks. But that isn't the issue. The issue is that the
4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64 files are NOT in /boot directly so they aren't
found by mkconfig. Of course, I could copy them there but that doesn't
seem like it should be necessary.
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Kernel installed in wrong location

[CLOSE Dave]

Ed Greshko wrote:

>> [root@machine ~]# ls /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b
>> 0-rescue 4.13.10-200.fc26.x86_64  4.13.9-200.fc26.x86_64
>> 4.11.11-300.fc26.x86_64  4.13.11-200.fc26.x86_64  4.14.11-300.fc27.x86_64
>> 4.12.11-300.fc26.x86_64  4.13.12-200.fc26.x86_64  4.14.4-200.fc26.x86_64
>> 4.12.12-300.fc26.x86_64  4.13.13-200.fc26.x86_64  4.14.5-200.fc26.x86_64
>> 4.12.13-300.fc26.x86_64  4.13.15-100.fc25.x86_64  4.14.6-200.fc26.x86_64
>> 4.12.14-300.fc26.x86_64  4.13.15-200.fc26.x86_64  4.15.8-300.fc27.x86_64
>> 4.12.5-300.fc26.x86_64   4.13.16-200.fc26.x86_64  4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64
>> 4.12.8-300.fc26.x86_64   4.13.16-202.fc26.x86_64
>> 4.12.9-300.fc26.x86_64   4.13.4-200.fc26.x86_64
> 
> All of those directories are empty, yes?

Most, but not all:

> # ls /boot/77*/*
> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/0-rescue:
> initrd  linux

> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.11.11-300.fc26.x86_64:

> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.12.11-300.fc26.x86_64:

> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.12.12-300.fc26.x86_64:

> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.12.13-300.fc26.x86_64:

> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.12.14-300.fc26.x86_64:

> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.12.5-300.fc26.x86_64:

> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.12.8-300.fc26.x86_64:

> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.12.9-300.fc26.x86_64:

> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.13.10-200.fc26.x86_64:

> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.13.11-200.fc26.x86_64:

> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.13.12-200.fc26.x86_64:

> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.13.13-200.fc26.x86_64:

> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.13.15-100.fc25.x86_64:

> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.13.15-200.fc26.x86_64:

> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.13.16-200.fc26.x86_64:

> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.13.16-202.fc26.x86_64:

> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.13.4-200.fc26.x86_64:

> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.13.9-200.fc26.x86_64:

> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.14.11-300.fc27.x86_64:

> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.14.4-200.fc26.x86_64:

> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.14.5-200.fc26.x86_64:

> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.14.6-200.fc26.x86_64:

> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.15.8-300.fc27.x86_64:
> initrd  linux

> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64:
> initrd  linux
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Kernel installed in wrong location

[CLOSE Dave]

Further information from another attempt a few minutes ago. Could the
broken pipe be the problem? What could cause that? /boot is at 52%.

> # /usr/bin/dnf -y reinstall kernel*-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64
> Last metadata expiration check: 23:59:22 ago on Sun Mar 18 14:00:12 2018.
> Dependencies resolved.
> 
>  Package   ArchVersion   Repository
> Size
> 
> Reinstalling:
>  kernelx86_64  4.15.9-300.fc27   updates   81 
> k
>  kernel-core   x86_64  4.15.9-300.fc27   updates   23 
> M
>  kernel-devel  x86_64  4.15.9-300.fc27   updates   12 
> M
>  kernel-headersx86_64  4.15.9-300.fc27   updates  1.2 
> M
>  kernel-modulesx86_64  4.15.9-300.fc27   updates   27 
> M
>  kernel-modules-extra  x86_64  4.15.9-300.fc27   updates  2.2 
> M

> Transaction Summary
> 

> Total download size: 65 M
> Downloading Packages:
> (1/6): kernel-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64.rpm 13 MB/s |  81 kB 00:00
> (2/6): kernel-headers-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64.rp  48 MB/s | 1.2 MB 00:00
> (3/6): kernel-devel-4.15.8-300.fc27_4.15.9-300.  36 MB/s | 3.1 MB 00:00
> (4/6): kernel-modules-extra-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86  50 MB/s | 2.2 MB 00:00
> (5/6): kernel-core-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64.rpm55 MB/s |  23 MB 00:00
> (6/6): kernel-modules-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64.rp  50 MB/s |  27 MB 00:00
> [DRPM] kernel-devel-4.15.8-300.fc27_4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64.drpm: done
> 
> Total   2.4 MB/s |  56 MB 00:23
> Delta RPMs reduced 65.4 MB of updates to 56.4 MB (13.1% saved)
> Running transaction check
> Transaction check succeeded.
> Running transaction test
> Transaction test succeeded.
> Running transaction
>   Preparing:
> 1/1
>   Reinstalling : kernel-core-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64
> 1/12
>   Running scriptlet: kernel-core-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64
> 1/12
>   Reinstalling : kernel-modules-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64 
> 2/12
>   Running scriptlet: kernel-modules-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64 
> 2/12
>   Reinstalling : kernel-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64 
> 3/12
>   Reinstalling : kernel-modules-extra-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64   
> 4/12
>   Running scriptlet: kernel-modules-extra-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64   
> 4/12
>   Reinstalling : kernel-headers-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64 
> 5/12
>   Reinstalling : kernel-devel-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64   
> 6/12
>   Running scriptlet: kernel-devel-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64   
> 6/12
>   Erasing  : kernel-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64 
> 7/12
>   Running scriptlet: kernel-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64 
> 7/12
>   Erasing  : kernel-headers-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64 
> 8/12
>   Erasing  : kernel-devel-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64   
> 9/12
>   Erasing  : kernel-modules-extra-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64  
> 10/12
>   Running scriptlet: kernel-modules-extra-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64  
> 10/12
>   Erasing  : kernel-modules-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64
> 11/12
>   Running scriptlet: kernel-modules-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64
> 11/12
>   Running scriptlet: kernel-core-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64   
> 12/12
>   Erasing  : kernel-core-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64   
> 12/12
>   Running scriptlet: kernel-core-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64   
> 12/12
> cat: write error: Broken pipe
>   Verifying: kernel-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64 
> 1/12
>   Verifying: kernel-core-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64
> 2/12
>   Verifying: kernel-devel-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64   
> 3/12
>   Verifying: kernel-headers-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64 
> 4/12
>   Verifying: kernel-modules-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64 
> 5/12
>   Verifying: kernel-modules-extra-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64   
> 6/12
>   Verifying: kernel-core-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64
> 7/12
>   Verifying: kernel-devel-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64   
> 8/12
>   Verifying: kernel-headers-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64 
> 9/12
>   Verifying: kernel-modules-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64
> 10/12
>   Verifying: kernel-modules-extra-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64  
> 11/12
>   Verifying

Re: Kernel installed in wrong location

[CLOSE Dave]

Further, here is an extract of /var/log/messages for the attempted
reinstall, surpressing the timestamp and dracut indicator.

> dracut-046-8.git20180105.fc27
> Executing: /usr/bin/dracut 
> /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64/initrd 
> 4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64
> dracut module 'busybox' will not be installed, because command 'busybox' 
> could not be found!
> dracut module 'busybox' will not be installed, because command 'busybox' 
> could not be found!
> *** Including module: bash ***
> *** Including module: systemd ***
> *** Including module: systemd-initrd ***
> *** Including module: nss-softokn ***
> *** Including module: i18n ***
> *** Including module: network ***
> *** Including module: ifcfg ***
> *** Including module: drm ***
> *** Including module: plymouth ***
> *** Including module: dm ***
> Skipping udev rule: 64-device-mapper.rules
> Skipping udev rule: 60-persistent-storage-dm.rules
> Skipping udev rule: 55-dm.rules
> *** Including module: kernel-modules ***
> *** Including module: kernel-network-modules ***
> *** Including module: lvm ***
> Skipping udev rule: 64-device-mapper.rules
> Skipping udev rule: 56-lvm.rules
> Skipping udev rule: 60-persistent-storage-lvm.rules
> *** Including module: resume ***
> *** Including module: rootfs-block ***
> *** Including module: terminfo ***
> *** Including module: udev-rules ***
> Skipping udev rule: 40-redhat.rules
> Skipping udev rule: 50-firmware.rules
> Skipping udev rule: 50-udev.rules
> Skipping udev rule: 91-permissions.rules
> Skipping udev rule: 80-drivers-modprobe.rules
> *** Including module: biosdevname ***
> *** Including module: dracut-systemd ***
> *** Including module: usrmount ***
> *** Including module: base ***
> *** Including module: fs-lib ***
> *** Including module: shutdown ***
> *** Including modules done ***
> *** Installing kernel module dependencies ***
> *** Installing kernel module dependencies done ***
> *** Resolving executable dependencies ***
> *** Resolving executable dependencies done***
> *** Hardlinking files ***
> *** Hardlinking files done ***
> *** Stripping files ***
> *** Stripping files done ***
> *** Generating early-microcode cpio image ***
> *** Constructing GenuineIntel.bin 
> *** Store current command line parameters ***
> *** Creating image file 
> '/boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64/initrd' ***
> *** Creating initramfs image file 
> '/boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b/4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64/initrd' done 
> ***
-- 
Dave Close, Thales InFlyt Experience, Irvine California USA.
cell +1 949 394 2124, dave.cl...@us.thalesgroup.com

 "1800: Joseph Marie Jacquard teaches a loom to read punch cards,
  creating the first heavily multi-threaded processing unit."
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Kernel installed in wrong location

[CLOSE Dave]

Rick Stevens wrote:

>> Fedora 27 x86_64. When DNF installs a new kernel, it isn't going into
>> the right place (/boot) and is not detected by GRUB. Why not?

> Sure looks like the scriptlet didn't run. I think you should get a
> report about the initramfs image and the system map having different
> modes and that they're ghost files (not part of the package payload as
> they are created by the post-install scriptlet). I get:
> 
> [root@golem4 boot]# rpm -V kernel-core-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64
> .M...  g /boot/System.map-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64
> .M...  g /boot/initramfs-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64.img
> 
> (the "M" means different modes and the "g" means "ghost file"). Check
> your dnf logs to verify that something didn't go wrong during the
> install process.

My /etc/dnf/dnf.conf contains only the default:

> [main]
> gpgcheck=1
> installonly_limit=3
> clean_requirements_on_remove=true

The portion of /var/log/dnf.log for an attempted reinstall shows:

> 2018-03-19T18:33:55Z INFO Dependencies resolved.
> 2018-03-19T18:33:55Z INFO 
> 
>  PackageArch  Version  Repository  
> Size
> 
> Reinstalling:
>  kernel-corex86_644.15.9-300.fc27  updates 23 
> M
> 
> Transaction Summary
> 
> 
> 2018-03-19T18:33:55Z INFO Total download size: 23 M
> 2018-03-19T18:33:55Z INFO Downloading Packages:
> 2018-03-19T18:33:56Z SUBDEBUG Call: RPMPayload._end_cb: ( object at 0x7f5df909e6d8>, 0, None), {}
> 2018-03-19T18:33:56Z INFO 
> 
> 2018-03-19T18:33:56Z INFO Total66 
> MB/s |  23 MB 00:00
> 2018-03-19T18:33:56Z INFO Running transaction check
> 2018-03-19T18:33:59Z INFO Transaction check succeeded.
> 2018-03-19T18:33:59Z INFO Running transaction test
> 2018-03-19T18:34:13Z INFO Transaction test succeeded.
> 2018-03-19T18:34:13Z DDEBUG timer: transaction test: 14222 ms
> 2018-03-19T18:34:13Z INFO Running transaction
> 2018-03-19T18:34:19Z DDEBUG RPM transaction start.
> 2018-03-19T18:35:17Z DDEBUG RPM transaction over.
> 2018-03-19T18:35:33Z DDEBUG timer: verify transaction: 16178 ms
> 2018-03-19T18:35:33Z DDEBUG timer: transaction: 79880 ms
> 2018-03-19T18:35:33Z DEBUG Completion plugin: Generating completion cache...
> 2018-03-19T18:35:33Z INFO
> Reinstalled:
>   kernel-core.x86_64 4.15.9-300.fc27
> 
> 2018-03-19T18:35:33Z INFO Complete!
> 2018-03-19T18:35:33Z DDEBUG Cleaning up.
> 2018-03-19T18:35:33Z DDEBUG 
> /var/cache/dnf/updates-7dab57dbb768f030/packages/kernel-core-4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64.rpm
>  removed

I don't see anything strange about /boot/grub2/grub.cfg or
/etc/default/grub (which is identical to other local machines that are
working as expected). What should I be looking for to see why the kernel
is only being installed in the rescue directory?
-- 
Dave Close, Thales InFlyt Experience, Irvine California USA.
cell +1 949 394 2124, dave.cl...@us.thalesgroup.com

 "1800: Joseph Marie Jacquard teaches a loom to read punch cards,
  creating the first heavily multi-threaded processing unit."
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Kernel installed in wrong location

[CLOSE Dave]

Fedora 27 x86_64. When DNF installs a new kernel, it isn't going into
the right place (/boot) and is not detected by GRUB. Why not?

For example, after installing the most recent new kernel, I see this.

[root@machine ~]# ls /boot
7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b
config-4.14.11-300.fc27.x86_64
efi
extlinux
grub2
initramfs-0-rescue-7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b.img
initramfs-4.14.11-300.fc27.x86_64.img
initrd-plymouth.img
loader
lost+found
System.map-4.14.11-300.fc27.x86_64
vmlinuz-0-rescue-7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b
vmlinuz-4.14.11-300.fc27.x86_64

[root@machine ~]# ls /boot/7725dfc225d14958a625ddaaaea5962b
0-rescue 4.13.10-200.fc26.x86_64  4.13.9-200.fc26.x86_64
4.11.11-300.fc26.x86_64  4.13.11-200.fc26.x86_64  4.14.11-300.fc27.x86_64
4.12.11-300.fc26.x86_64  4.13.12-200.fc26.x86_64  4.14.4-200.fc26.x86_64
4.12.12-300.fc26.x86_64  4.13.13-200.fc26.x86_64  4.14.5-200.fc26.x86_64
4.12.13-300.fc26.x86_64  4.13.15-100.fc25.x86_64  4.14.6-200.fc26.x86_64
4.12.14-300.fc26.x86_64  4.13.15-200.fc26.x86_64  4.15.8-300.fc27.x86_64
4.12.5-300.fc26.x86_64   4.13.16-200.fc26.x86_64  4.15.9-300.fc27.x86_64
4.12.8-300.fc26.x86_64   4.13.16-202.fc26.x86_64
4.12.9-300.fc26.x86_64   4.13.4-200.fc26.x86_64

But RPM thinks the new kernel was installed correctly!

[root@machine ~]# rpm -V kernel-core-4.15.9-300.fc27
 (no output)
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Fedora documentation

[CLOSE Dave]

Online Fedora documentation seems to be intentionally broken. The site
has been redesigned and all links fail. Every link redirects to the site
main page and the main page does not include any search function.

Specifically, the RPM guide (a document which has been in "draft" status
for a long time but is extremely useful nonetheless), is nowhere to be
found. It was at
.
-- 
Dave Close
 "Age is a very high price to pay for maturity." -- Tom Stoppard
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Docker question

[CLOSE Dave]

I've asked this question on the Docker support forum (no email
available!) but have seen no answers. If there are other better places
to ask, please let me know.

I have a Fedora 23 host (to be upgraded to F25 or F26 in the near
future). It has two networks and I want to run a Docker container that
can participate in both of them. The host defines these two networks
(and a gateway on a third network),

$ route -n
Destination GatewayGenmask...  Iface
default w.x.y.254  0.0.0.0...  eth0
a.b.c.0 0.0.0.0255.255.255.0  ...  eth2
e.f.g.0 0.0.0.0255.255.255.0  ...  eth3

So far for Docker, I have,

(1) $ docker network create --subnet a.b.c.0/24 --gateway a.b.c.254 eth2
(2) $ docker network create --subnet e.f.g.0/24 --gateway e.f.g.254 eth3
(3) $ docker create --network=eth2 --ip=a.b.c.1 container program
(4) $ docker network connect --ip=e.f.g.1 eth3 container
(5) $ docker start container
# (With a few more arguments in real life.)

This gets me most of what I want except the ability to actually
participate in the host's networks. Traffic doesn't leave the container.
I understand I must somehow map the container's networks to the host's
networks. But I'm having trouble learning how to do that.

I can map the first network, I think. Instead of line (3) above, I try,

(6) $ docker create --network=eth2 --ip=a.b.c.1 \
  -p a.b.c.d:1-65535:1-65535/tcp -p a.b.c.d:1-65535:1-65535/udp \
  container program

But I don't see how to map the second network since the -p option is not
available for "docker network connect" (or for "docker start"). Of
course, using -p might not be the proper solution, anyway. Is it
possible to do what I want?

I'm using docker-engine-1.12.6-1.fc23.x86_64 and associated packages
from Docker, not Fedora's own Docker packages, because the latest
available from Fedora for F23 is Docker 1.10.
-- 
 Dave Close
 "Age is a very high price to pay for maturity." -- Tom Stoppard
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Blocking root login via PAM

[CLOSE Dave]

If I run ">/etc/securetty" and add "auth [user_unknown=ignore success=ok
ignore=ignore default=bad] pam_securetty.so" to various /etc/pam.d/*
files (as described in
),
root login on the console is blocked as it should be. But the user gets
no hint of the problem, merely a refreshed login screen. Is there a way
to display a message in this case?
-- 
 Dave Close
 "Age is a very high price to pay for maturity." -- Tom Stoppard
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Multi-user VNC on F23 and later

[CLOSE Dave]

Ed Greshko wrote:

> Oh, and since I think you said you're not using IPv6 for anything you
> can disable it completely and try again.
> 
> Adding ipv6.disable=1 to the boot parameters seems to work the best.
> That way it is disabled from boot time.

That did it! The greeting screen now appears as it should. Thanks!
-- 
 Dave Close

 "Age is a very high price to pay for maturity." -- Tom Stoppard
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Multi-user VNC on F23 and later

[CLOSE Dave]

Ed Greshko wrote:

> I found that if I have ListenStream=192.168.1.198:5901 in my
> xvnc.socket file I also get a failure on boot.  I thought it could
> have been due to my using DHCP on that VM.  I changed it back to
> ListenStream=5901.  Can you try just having that?

The socket now reports that it is up correctly after boot. But I still
get a blank screen on connecting.
-- 
 Dave Close

 "Age is a very high price to pay for maturity." -- Tom Stoppard
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Multi-user VNC on F23 and later

[CLOSE Dave]

On 07/10/17 17:32, Ed Greshko wrote:

> Odd that you're getting an IPV6 error message.  I don't have a global
> IPv6 address and only show
> 
> [egreshko@f25f system]$ ip address show enp0s3
> 2: enp0s3:  mtu 1500 qdisc fq_codel state UP 
> group
> default qlen 1000
> link/ether 08:00:27:15:6d:e0 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
> inet 192.168.1.198/24 brd 192.168.1.255 scope global dynamic enp0s3
>valid_lft 84207sec preferred_lft 84207sec
> inet6 fe80::a00:27ff:fe15:6de0/64 scope link
>valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever

Yes, I also found that strange. But the address shown is the right one
per the output of ifconfig. I'm not intentionally running v6...
-- 
 Dave Close

 "Age is a very high price to pay for maturity." -- Tom Stoppard
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Multi-user VNC on F23 and later

[CLOSE Dave]

Ed Greshko wrote:

> You have a line in the Service segment of "Type".  I do not have that
> and it isn't in the original file in /lib/systemd/system.  Did you
> add that?

Rick Stevens wrote:

> I believe "Type=simple" is the default if you have "ExecStart="
> defined, but it wouldn't hurt to add it. After you edit any of these
> files, make sure you do a "systemctl daemon-reload" or your changes
> won't be seen by systemd until a reboot.

I had that line because it was in the example in bug 1393971. It isn't
in the later pages which seem to be derived from that. But, as you say,
having it or not doesn't make any difference.
-- 
Dave Close, Thales InFlyt Experience, Irvine California USA.
cell +1 949 394 2124, dave.cl...@us.thalesgroup.com

 "Age is a very high price to pay for maturity." -- Tom Stoppard
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Multi-user VNC on F23 and later

[CLOSE Dave]

Ed Greshko wrote:

>> HOWEVER, when I connect with "vncviewer server::5901", I get a blank
>> screen with a momentary F8 prompt. I do not see the normal greeting
>> screen. Something is still missing.

> Then I noticed one thing which seems off or odd do me. 
> 
> When you do "systemctl -l status xvnc.socket" you system is outputting
> 2 lines.
> 
> Jul 10 14:10:50 server systemd[1]: Listening on XVNC Server.
> Jul 10 14:10:50 server systemd[1]: Starting XVNC Server.
> 
> My system outputs only one.
> 
> Jul 11 06:48:30 f25f.greshko.com systemd[1]: Listening on XVNC Server.

That is evidently due to something wrong during boot. After a fresh
boot, here's what I see.

[root@server ~]# systemctl status xvnc.socket
  xvnc.socket - XVNC Server
   Loaded: loaded (/etc/systemd/system/xvnc.socket; enabled; vendor
preset: disabled)
   Active: failed (Result: resources)
   Listen: 10.76.185.91:5901 (Stream)
 Accepted: 0; Connected: 0

Jul 10 16:57:13 server systemd[1]: xvnc.socket: Failed to listen on
sock...ss
Jul 10 16:57:13 server systemd[1]: Failed to listen on XVNC Server.
Jul 10 16:57:13 server systemd[1]: xvnc.socket: Unit entered failed state.
Jul 10 16:57:13 server systemd[1]: Starting XVNC Server.
Hint: Some lines were ellipsized, use -l to show in full.
[root@server ~]# systemctl start xvnc.socket
[root@server ~]# systemctl status xvnc.socket
  xvnc.socket - XVNC Server
   Loaded: loaded (/etc/systemd/system/xvnc.socket; enabled; vendor
preset: disabled)
   Active: active (listening) since Mon 2017-07-10 17:04:20 PDT; 1s ago
   Listen: 10.76.185.91:5901 (Stream)
 Accepted: 0; Connected: 0

Jul 10 17:04:20 server systemd[1]: Listening on XVNC Server.
Jul 10 17:04:20 server systemd[1]: Starting XVNC Server.

> Without any clients connected/connecting can you check to see if Xvnc is
> running?  I only have a running /usr/bin/Xvnc when a client is connected.

Without a connection, "ps -ef | grep vnc" shows only the grep. During an
attempted connection, Xvnc is running with all the right options.

> Also, check /var/log/kdm.log to see if there are errors.

/var/log/kdm.log just tells me that useful messages are in syslog. In
there, greping for kdm, I see:

Jul 10 16:56:07 server audit: SERVICE_START pid=1 uid=0 auid=4294967295
ses=4294967295 msg='unit=kdm comm="systemd"
exe="/usr/lib/systemd/systemd" hostname=? addr=? terminal=? res=success'
Jul 10 16:56:07 server audit: SERVICE_STOP pid=1 uid=0 auid=4294967295
ses=4294967295 msg='unit=kdm comm="systemd"
exe="/usr/lib/systemd/systemd" hostname=? addr=? terminal=? res=success'
Jul 10 16:57:27 server audit: SERVICE_START pid=1 uid=0 auid=4294967295
ses=4294967295 msg='unit=kdm comm="systemd"
exe="/usr/lib/systemd/systemd" hostname=? addr=? terminal=? res=success'
Jul 10 16:57:27 server kdm[1676]: plymouth is running
Jul 10 16:57:27 server kdm[1676]: plymouth is active on VT 1, reusing for :0
Jul 10 16:57:27 server kdm[1676]: plymouth should quit after server startup
Jul 10 16:57:30 server kdm[1676]: Quitting Plymouth with transition
Jul 10 16:57:30 server kdm[1676]: Is Plymouth still running? no

And when I try to connect,

Jul 10 17:05:49 server kdm: fe80::3617:ebff:feeb:6b02:1[7472]: Cannot
connect to fe80::3617:ebff:feeb:6b02:1, giving up
Jul 10 17:05:49 server kdm[1676]: Display fe80::3617:ebff:feeb:6b02:1
cannot be opened
-- 
 Dave Close

 "Age is a very high price to pay for maturity." -- Tom Stoppard
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Multi-user VNC on F23 and later

[CLOSE Dave]

Ed Greshko wrote:

> You actually don't want xvnc@.service to be enabled or started.  The
> connection to the socket triggers starting of Xvnc

I realized that a while ago but forgot. It is presently not enabled.

> I find it odd that you get this "Listen: 10.76.185.91:5901"  when
> your file below for xvnc.socket has
> "ListenStream=10.76.185.91:5900".

I did my cut-and-paste to these messages from different tests. I'm
actually trying to use port 5901 to make the transition transparent for
users who are now using the single-user access technique.

I had written:

> # systemctl status -l xvnc@:.service
> ...
> Jul 07 18:27:08 server systemd[1]: xvnc@:.service: Got more than one socket.

> # systemctl status -l xvnc.socket
> ...
>Active: failed (Result: resources)

This was caused because the old service, vncserver@:1, was still
running. After I stopped it (and deleted the files, just to be sure),
status looks correct.

---

# systemctl -l status xvnc.socket
  xvnc.socket - XVNC Server
   Loaded: loaded (/etc/systemd/system/xvnc.socket; enabled; vendor
preset: disabled)
   Active: active (listening) since Mon 2017-07-10 14:10:50 PDT; 27min ago
   Listen: 10.76.185.91:5901 (Stream)
 Accepted: 2; Connected: 0

Jul 10 14:10:50 pses37top systemd[1]: Listening on XVNC Server.
Jul 10 14:10:50 pses37top systemd[1]: Starting XVNC Server.

# cat /etc/systemd/system/xvnc.socket
[Unit]
Description=XVNC Server

[Socket]
ListenStream=10.76.185.91:5901
Accept=yes

[Install]
WantedBy=sockets.target

# cat /etc/systemd/system/xvnc@.service
[Unit]
Description=XVNC per Connection Daemon
After=syslog.target

[Service]
Type=simple
ExecStart=-/usr/bin/Xvnc -inetd -query localhost -geometry 1024x768
-depth 24 -once -SecurityTypes=None -fp /usr/share/X11/fonts/misc
StandardInput=socket
StandardError=syslog

---

HOWEVER, when I connect with "vncviewer server::5901", I get a blank
screen with a momentary F8 prompt. I do not see the normal greeting
screen. Something is still missing.
-- 
Dave Close, Thales InFlyt Experience, Irvine California USA.
cell +1 949 394 2124, dave.cl...@us.thalesgroup.com

 "Age is a very high price to pay for maturity." -- Tom Stoppard
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Multi-user VNC on F23 and later

[CLOSE Dave]

Ed Greshko wrote:

> OK.   Sorry to have misunderstood precisely what you want to do. I
> now have it working as I suspect you need it.

Great. Thanks.

> 1.  Yes, you need KDM.  So, if you've not installed it do so.
> 
> 2.  Edit /etc/kde/kdm/kdmrc the [Xdmcp] section Enable=true.
> 
> 3.  Go to /lib/systemd/system and copy xvnc@.service and xvnc.socket
> to /etc/systemd/system

Done previously.

> 4.  Edit /etc/systemd/system/xvnc@.service and delete the User=nobody
> line.

Done now. Wasn't done before.

> 5.  Now this part is "temporary" until I determine the "proper" way
> to fix it.  Edit /etc/sysconfig/selinux and change it to be
> permissive.  If you don't do that then Xvnc won't be able to bind to
> port 5900.

Running selinux disabled.

> 6.  Enable port 5900 on your firewall.
> 
> 7.  If you've not already done it "systemctl --force enable kdm"

Done previously.

> 8.  Reboot.
> 
> Your console should now be showing KDM as your login screen.
> 
> And you now should be able to connect with something like remmina
> using VNC protocol and get presented with a KDM login screen.
> 
> If you run into trouble, let me know.

Almost. But the service isn't starting.

# systemctl status -l xvnc@:.service
  xvnc@:.service - XVNC per Connection Daemon
   Loaded: loaded (/etc/systemd/system/xvnc@.service; enabled; vendor
preset: disabled)
   Active: failed (Result: resources)

Jul 07 18:27:08 server systemd[1]: xvnc@:.service: Got more than one socket.
Jul 07 18:27:08 server systemd[1]: xvnc@:.service: Failed to run 'start'
task: Invalid argument
Jul 07 18:27:08 server systemd[1]: Failed to start XVNC per Connection
Daemon.
Jul 07 18:27:08 server systemd[1]: xvnc@:.service: Unit entered failed
state.
Jul 07 18:27:08 server systemd[1]: xvnc@:.service: Failed with result
'resources'.
Jul 07 18:27:08 server systemd[1]: Starting XVNC per Connection Daemon...

# systemctl status -l xvnc.socket
● xvnc.socket - XVNC Server
   Loaded: loaded (/etc/systemd/system/xvnc.socket; enabled; vendor
preset: disabled)
   Active: failed (Result: resources)
   Listen: 10.76.185.91:5901 (Stream)
 Accepted: 0; Connected: 0

Jul 07 18:27:06 server systemd[1]: xvnc.socket: Failed to listen on
sockets: Cannot assign requested address
Jul 07 18:27:06 server systemd[1]: Failed to listen on XVNC Server.
Jul 07 18:27:06 server systemd[1]: xvnc.socket: Unit entered failed state.
Jul 07 18:27:06 server systemd[1]: Starting XVNC Server.

Here's my files.

# cd /etc/systemd/system
# cat xvnc@.service
[Unit]
Description=XVNC per Connection Daemon
After=syslog.target

[Service]
Type=simple
ExecStart=-/usr/bin/Xvnc -inetd -query localhost -geometry 1024x768
-depth 24 -once -SecurityTypes=None -fp /usr/share/X11/fonts/misc
StandardInput=socket
StandardError=syslog

[Install]
WantedBy=multi-user.target
# cat xvnc.*
[Unit]
Description=XVNC Server

[Socket]
ListenStream=10.76.185.91:5900
Accept=yes

[Install]
WantedBy=sockets.target
-- 
 Dave Close

 "Age is a very high price to pay for maturity." -- Tom Stoppard
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Multi-user VNC on F23 and later

[CLOSE Dave]

I wrote:

> I'm trying to setup a multi-user VNC server on recent versions of
> Fedora without success thus far. I understand that doing so requires
> a display manager with XDMCP support. The current default DM is SDDM
> which does not include such support (at least so far as I've found).
> That means I need to change the DM.
> 
> Following a suggestion I found somewhere, I ran "dnf install kdm; 
> systemctl enable --force kdm.service". I chose KDM because the
> machines involved generally use KDE, not Gnome. That seems to be a
> painless substitution. However, I'm sure I'll have to install some
> protections against automatic updates that reverse the change.
> 
> Then I tried to follow the instructions in RH Bugzilla 1393971 
> () and those at
> RH Solutions 2516 (for XDMCP with xinetd) and 2681531 (which
> replaces xinetd with a systemd socket). I also modified
> /etc/kde/kdm/Xaccess to uncomment "*". After this I get a connection
> but no login screen, just a blank screen with a momentary note about
> using F8.
> 
> The log shows several errors at different times in my experiments. 
> Sometimes Plymouth is not running. Sometimes I'm told the VNC
> service got more than one socket. Usually KDM reports that it can't
> open the display, using an IPv6 notation for the display.
> 
> Can anyone point me to instructions which take into account systemd
> and the structure of recent Fedora releases? It seems to me likely
> that I've messed up something simple in trying to adapt the
> instructions (which are for xinetd and GDM). Or have I provided
> enough information to make a guess as to the problem?

On 07/06/17 19:51, Ed Greshko wrote:
> 
> This should help
> 
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/21/html/System_Administrators_Guide/ch-TigerVNC.html
>
>  Especially
> 
> 8.1.2.1. Configuring VNC Server for Two Users

> Oh, and FWIW, I am currently running only a single user setup on an
> F25/KDE-Only system.  No need to change sddm as your DM as that isn't
> what is being used by VNC.

Unfortunately, no, that doesn't help. I already have a one-user setup 
working and I understand how to extend it to additional users -- so long 
as the list of users is finite and known to me in advance. But the 
extension technique involves using unique ports for each user. It is not 
a properly scalable solution.

With the single-user approach, vncviewer directly asks the user for his 
password before initiating the connection. That's why it needs a unique 
port for each user. Using XDMCP with a display manager that supports it 
works differently. vncviewer doesn't ask for a password and initiates 
the connection immediately. The user is presented with the same 
graphical login screen a local user would see. Thus the number of users 
is not limited by anything I do setting up the configuration.

So, I'm still hoping someone here can help.
-- 
  Dave Close

  "Age is a very high price to pay for maturity." -- Tom Stoppard
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Multi-user VNC on F23 and later

[CLOSE Dave]

I'm trying to setup a multi-user VNC server on recent versions of Fedora 
without success thus far. I understand that doing so requires a display 
manager with XDMCP support. The current default DM is SDDM which does 
not include such support (at least so far as I've found). That means I 
need to change the DM.

Following a suggestion I found somewhere, I ran "dnf install kdm; 
systemctl enable --force kdm.service". I chose KDM because the machines 
involved generally use KDE, not Gnome. That seems to be a painless 
substitution. However, I'm sure I'll have to install some protections 
against automatic updates that reverse the change.

Then I tried to follow the instructions in RH Bugzilla 1393971 
() and those at RH 
Solutions 2516 (for XDMCP with xinetd) and 2681531 (which replaces 
xinetd with a systemd socket). I also modified /etc/kde/kdm/Xaccess to 
uncomment "*". After this I get a connection but no login screen, just a 
blank screen with a momentary note about using F8.

The log shows several errors at different times in my experiments. 
Sometimes Plymouth is not running. Sometimes I'm told the VNC service 
got more than one socket. Usually KDM reports that it can't open the 
display, using an IPv6 notation for the display.

Can anyone point me to instructions which take into account systemd and 
the structure of recent Fedora releases? It seems to me likely that I've 
messed up something simple in trying to adapt the instructions (which 
are for xinetd and GDM). Or have I provided enough information to make a 
guess as to the problem?
-- 
  Dave Close

  "Age is a very high price to pay for maturity." -- Tom Stoppard
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: dnf reposync documentation?

[CLOSE Dave]

On 02/14/17 18:31, Rick Stevens wrote:

> Try "dnf reposync --repoid google-chrome". The "--repoid
> google-chrome" works with repoquery.

The reference to repoid "google-chrome" apparently refers to the name in 
the .repo file (in /etc/yum.repos.d). But it also apparently is used to 
determine where the downloaded files are stored. There's nothing in the 
.repo file to specify the download location.

When I run this command, I must first make the desired location my 
current directory. But the downloaded files aren't stored there; they go 
into a new sub-directory called google-chrome under it. I try to use a 
directory structure that mirrors the original at Google so this doesn't 
work for me:

  # cd /var/www/html/pub/google/linux/chrome/rpm/stable/x86_64/
  # dnf reposync --repoid google-chrome

The sync works but since the files aren't in the right place, they're 
useless. There must be a way to specify the target directory, but since 
there's no man page I'm lost. Looking at the Python source, it appears 
that -p might work. It claims the default is "./" but specifying "-p ." 
or "-p /var/www/html/pub/google/linux/chrome/rpm/stable/x86_64/" doesn't 
change the behavior at all.
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: dnf reposync documentation?

[CLOSE Dave]

On 02/14/17 18:47, Ed Greshko wrote:

>> Try "dnf reposync --repoid google-chrome". The "--repoid google-chrome"
>> works with repoquery.
>
> Yes, that would work.  Except, it seems,
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1325350 is currently unresolved.
>
> So, one must add keepcache=true to /etc/dnf/dnf.conf

Thanks. The command is accepted but not processed for me. I think this 
time it's because IT is playing with our proxy. When they get it 
working, I'll try again.

It seems there is still no man page. And as you said, the online 
reference is just wrong (out of date).
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

dnf reposync documentation?

[CLOSE Dave]

# uname -a
Linux machine 4.9.9-200.fc25.x86_64 #1 SMP Thu Feb 9 17:28:13 UTC 2017 
x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

# man dnf.plugin.reposync
No manual entry for dnf.plugin.reposync

Copying arguments from my working (YUM) reposync command doesn't work.

# dnf reposync -r google-chrome --norepopath -m
usage: dnf reposync [--help-cmd] [-p DOWNLOAD_PATH] [--repo REPO]

optional arguments:
   --help-cmdshow this help about this tool
   -p DOWNLOAD_PATH, --download-path DOWNLOAD_PATH
 where to store downloaded repositories
   --repo REPO   repository to download
Error: unrecognized arguments: -r google-chrome --norepopath -m

Trying a simple command per the help output above.

# dnf reposync --repo google-chrome
usage: dnf [--allowerasing] [-b] [-C] [-c [config file]] [-d [debug level]]
[--debugsolver] [--showduplicates] [-e ERRORLEVEL]
[--rpmverbosity [debug level name]] [-q] [-v] [-y] [--assumeno]
[--version] [--installroot [path]] [--enablerepo [repo]]
[--disablerepo [repo]] [-x [package]] [--disableexcludes [repo]]
[--repofrompath [repo,path]] [--noplugins] [--nogpgcheck]
[--disableplugin [plugin]] [--color COLOR]
[--releasever RELEASEVER] [--setopt SETOPTS] [--refresh] 
[-4] [-6]
[--downloadonly] [-h]
Command line error: argument --repofrompath: bad format: google-chrome

===

Evidently the command syntax is a bit confused. I get different ideas 
from the two commands.

Can anyone point me to the real documentation of this command? Or tell 
me how to translate my YUM command to the DNF equivalent?
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Problems with kernel 4.7.10-100.fc23

[CLOSE Dave]

I have several machines still running Fedora 23 but otherwise kept 
current with all posted updates. The latest kernel, 4.7.10-100.fc23, is 
causing me several troubles.

1. On these machines, I run iptables but not firewalld. The only reason 
I need either is to provide a NAT service. With the latest kernel, 
iptables with NAT refuses to start. From syslog:

> (Date elided below for readability)
> systemd: Starting IPv4 firewall with iptables...
> iptables.init: iptables: Applying firewall rules: iptables-restore v1.4.21: 
> iptables-restore: unable to initialize table 'nat'
> iptables.init: Error occurred at line: 1
> iptables.init: Try `iptables-restore -h' or 'iptables-restore --help' for 
> more information.
> iptables.init: [FAILED]
> systemd: iptables.service: Main process exited, code=exited, status=1/FAILURE
> audit: SERVICE_START pid=1 uid=0 auid=4294967295 ses=4294967295 
> msg='unit=iptables comm="systemd" exe="/usr/lib/systemd/systemd" hostname=? 
> addr=? terminal=? res=failed'
> systemd: Failed to start IPv4 firewall with iptables.
> systemd: iptables.service: Unit entered failed state.
> systemd: iptables.service: Failed with result 'exit-code'.

Downgrading to kernel 4.7.9-100.fc23 resolved this issue.

2. These machines have two network interfaces and act as a bridge 
between two networks, one public and the other RFC1918. That's why they 
need the NAT. When performing an SSH connection from one of these 
machines to one of the other machines on its own RFC1918 network, the 
source of the connection is reported as the machine's public address, 
not its RFC1918 address. That violates some of the SSHD rules used on 
the target machine and prevents the connection. With previous kernels, 
the reported source address was the machine's RFC1918 address.

Downgrading to kernel 4.7.9-100.fc23 did NOT resolve this issue. It may 
be (should be) possible to resolve it by re-installing with the earlier 
kernel but I haven't yet tried that.
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: install.img

[CLOSE Dave]

On 11/02/16 06:05, Michael Schwendt wrote:

> FWIW, I only remember such a file [install.img] from older releases
> of Fedora up to Fedora 14. For F20 there has been a separate
> squashfs.img.
>
> So, maybe tell which instructions you're trying to follow.

1. install.img is present in the F24 directory on fedoraproject.org. 
That led me to think it should be present for all the releases.

2. I was trying to do a PXE installation from a local repo mirror. It 
now appears that my treeinfo file was altered incorrectly and that was 
the source of the attempt to access install.img. I finally found copies 
of the correct file and discovered it should have been looking for 
squashfs.img, as you said. With that correction, things are working for me.

Thanks for everyone's patience.
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: install.img

[CLOSE Dave]

On 10/31/16 13:47, Rick Stevens wrote:

> Note there are two files each in the pxeboot and isolinux directory
> trees, initrd.img and upgrade.img. There is no install.img. There was
> a major rehash of the way the installers worked at F22 or
> thereabouts, so that might explain it. Checking the release notes
> should reveal that sort of info, but I can't recall when the switch
> happened. I'm getting old and suffer from CRS (can't remember s**t)
> syndrome now.

There are copies not only in the current F24 images directory but also
in the F14 archive images directory. No copies in the interim releases
that I can see. But I'm fairly certain that I once had a copy for F20.
I wish I still did.
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: install.img

[CLOSE Dave]

On 10/31/16 12:11, stan wrote:

> What is an install.img file?  That is, what is its function?  Is it
> possible that it is actually called initrd.img?

I've never seen a clear description of each of the files involved in a 
PXE installation, but install.img is certainly one of them. It may be 
the anaconda executable, but that's just a guess. It certainly is not 
the initial ram disk (initrd).

You will find a copy in the current F24 directories on 
fedoraproject.org, for example. But the copy seems to be release 
specific. I need one for F20 and that doesn't seem to be online.
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: install.img

[CLOSE Dave]

On 10/31/16 12:23, jd1008 wrote:
> Good grief You wqant to be spoonfed???
>
> see
> http://mirrordenver.fdcservers.net/fedora/linux/releases/20/Fedora/x86_64/os/

Well, maybe I'm blind, but that looks the same as fedoraproject to me. 
Is there some reason install.img is invisible to me?
-- 
Dave Close, Thales Avionics, Irvine California USA.
cell +1 949 394 2124, dave.cl...@us.thalesgroup.com

"Adding people to a late project makes it later."
-- Fred Brooks, The Mythical Man-Month
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: install.img

[CLOSE Dave]

>> I need a copy of the install.img file for Fedora 20. It doesn't seem to
>> be present in archives.fedoraproject.org or in the F20 netinstall ISO.
>> Can anyone point me to a copy?

On 10/31/16 11:47, jd1008 wrote:
> See http://archives.fedoraproject.org/pub/archive/fedora/linux/releases/

Thanks but no cigar... As I said, I don't see install.img there.

Index of /pub/archive/fedora/linux/releases/20/Fedora/x86_64/os/images

NameLast modified  Size
Fedora-20-x86_64-installtree-CHECKSUM   2013-12-13 03:51  1.3K
boot.iso2013-12-12 14:06  321M
efiboot.img 2013-12-12 14:06  6.1M
macboot.img 2013-12-12 14:06   25M
pxeboot/2013-12-12 14:06-
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

install.img

[CLOSE Dave]

I need a copy of the install.img file for Fedora 20. It doesn't seem to 
be present in archives.fedoraproject.org or in the F20 netinstall ISO. 
Can anyone point me to a copy?
-- 
Dave Close
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Strange F24 upgrade

[CLOSE Dave]

I have several machines I've recently upgraded from F23 to F24 using 
DNF. Daily upgrades of F24 packages on most of them are proceeding as 
expected. But this morning I found one that did a very peculiar 
"upgrade". Details below.

# cat /etc/fedora-release
Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four)
# rpm -q fedora-release
fedora-release-24-2.noarch
# uname -a
Linux  4.6.6-300.fc24.x86_64 #1 SMP Wed Aug 10 21:07:35 UTC 
2016 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
# cat /var/log/dnf.rpm.log
...
Sep 07 23:31:25 INFO Upgraded: goffice-0.10.32-1.fc23.x86_64
Sep 07 23:31:28 INFO Upgraded: gnumeric-1:1.12.32-1.fc23.x86_64
Sep 07 23:31:28 INFO Upgraded: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-ECDSA-0.08-1.fc23.x86_64
Sep 07 23:31:29 INFO Upgraded: duplicity-0.7.10-1.fc23.x86_64
Sep 07 23:31:29 INFO Cleanup: gnumeric-1:1.12.31-1.fc24.x86_64
Sep 07 23:31:29 INFO Cleanup: goffice-0.10.30-1.fc24.x86_64
Sep 07 23:31:29 INFO Cleanup: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-ECDSA-0.07-4.fc24.x86_64
Sep 07 23:31:29 INFO Cleanup: duplicity-0.7.09-1.fc24.x86_64
...

So, it appears that, having been asked to do a routine upgrade, DNF 
chose to /downgrade/ these four packages to their F23 versions. Why? Is 
it just because the F23 versions are numerically greater than the F24 
versions? But how is DNF even finding the F23 packages in the F24 repos?
-- 
Dave Close
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

YUM check (Re: Cleaning up after an aborted upgrade)

[CLOSE Dave]

Samuel Sieb wrote:

>> Is there any counterpart of the old "yum check" where I can verify
>> everything is now ok?
>>
> I don't know what "yum check" did.  What are you trying to verify?

 From the man page for YUM.

> check  Checks the local rpmdb and produces information on any
>problems it  finds.  You can pass the check command the
>arguments "dependencies", "duplicates", "obsoletes" or
>"provides", to limit  the checking  that  is  performed
>(the  default is "all" which does all).
-- 
Dave Close
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: Cleaning up after an aborted upgrade

[CLOSE Dave]

Samuel Sieb wrote:

>> It seems to be trying to put everything back to F23. "rpm
>> -qa|sort" shows that almost all of the fc23 packages are paired
>> with fc24 packages, both of which are installed. Is there any
>> reason I can't just remove the redundant packages?
>>
> You probably have both fedora-release packages installed.  Remove the
> 23 one.

Yes, indeed! After removing fedora-release.fc23, distro-sync reports,

Upgrade   1 Package
Remove 1204 Packages
Downgrade 1 Package

Much better. All the ones to be removed are fc23.

Is there any counterpart of the old "yum check" where I can verify 
everything is now ok?
-- 
Dave Close, Thales Avionics, Irvine California USA.
cell +1 949 394 2124, dave.cl...@us.thalesgroup.com

"Progress isn't made by early risers. It's made by lazy men
trying to find easier ways to do something." --Robert Heinlein
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: Cleaning up after an aborted upgrade

[CLOSE Dave]

Samuel Sieb answered my plea for help. Thanks!

> First do "rpm --rebuilddb" to make sure the rpm database is consistent.
> Run "systemd-cat --version" to make sure you're currently running 229.
> If so, then do "rpm -e systemd-222-14".  Then try the upgrade again.

I was running 229 (fc24) as you expected. I then did as you suggested. 
The upgrade seemed to complete successfully.

> When the upgrade completes and if you still have extra packages, you can
> try "dnf distro-sync" to clean it up.  Make sure you carefully check the
> list of packages that it's going to remove.

After system-upgrade, I still have 4599 total packages, 1233 of which 
are fc23. distro-sync reports 40 "requires" or "conflicts" and suggests 
--allowerasing. Trying that reports,

Install   7 Packages
Upgrade   1 Package
Remove 1242 Packages
Downgrade  2002 Packages

It seems to be trying to put everything back to F23. "rpm -qa|sort" 
shows that almost all of the fc23 packages are paired with fc24 
packages, both of which are installed. Is there any reason I can't just 
remove the redundant packages?

> To find out what happened during the failed upgrade, run "dnf
> system-upgrade log" to get a list of upgrade attempts.  Then run "dnf
> system-upgrade log " to get the log.

# dnf system-upgrade log
The following boots appear to contain upgrade logs:
-- no logs were found --
-- 
Dave Close
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Cleaning up after an aborted upgrade

[CLOSE Dave]

I have a machine where I tried to do a system-upgrade from F23 to F24. 
The download portion worked fine but after the reboot, the upgrade 
process aborted. I'd like to know why, but first I need to clean up the 
mess so I can try it again. Right now I have 4782 total packages 
installed including 1490 fc24 packages. I haven't checked all of them 
but it appears that all are paired with the same fc23 package.

Trying to repeat the download step, I get this result.

# dnf --allowerasing -y system-upgrade download --releasever 24
Last metadata expiration check: 0:23:15 ago on Tue Sep  6 15:53:47 2016.
Dependencies resolved.
Error: The operation would result in removing the following protected 
packages: systemd.

Evidently, there are two systemd packages installed:

# rpm -q systemd
systemd-222-14.fc23.x86_64
systemd-229-13.fc24.x86_64

No new kernel was installed and the machine is running fine as F23. But 
I'd like to get it upgraded...

I tried using "dnf history rollback" but that didn't work, reporting "A 
transaction cannot be undone". Since dnf won't erase the extra stuff, I 
can probably do it with something like, "rpm erase --force $(rpm 
-qa|grep fc24)" but that seems iffy. Better suggestions are very welcome.
-- 
Dave Close
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Dell Inspiron 17 with Fedora

[CLOSE Dave]

This is just a notice for those who may care.

I installed Fedora 23 on a Dell Inspiron 17 laptop. If I use the latest 
kernel, 4.6.6-200, the screen flickers incessantly except when the 
touchpad is used to move the cursor. If I use a slightly older kernel, 
4.5.7-202, everything works fine.
-- 
Dave Close
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: Kickstart with a static interface

[CLOSE Dave]

I wrote:

> I want to kickstart a laptop with (of course) just one Ethernet
> interface. I can make it DHCP during the kickstart but I need it to end
> up as a static interface after installation. Is that possible? How?

> I should add that the static address I need after installation is
> private, not routeable, and can't reach the installation repositories.

Rick Stevens replied:

> Uh, after installation, boot it up and use Network Manager's editor
> ("nm-connection-editor" from the command line, or right-click on the
> Network Manager applet and select "Edit Connections") to configure the
> static IP (a.k.a. "Manual") for the connection. That's probably the
> easiest.

Not very practical as I need to do more than a hundred of these. And I
may need to allow others to do some of them. But I suppose I can do it
with a %post script. I was hoping for something more straight-forward.
-- 
Dave Close
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: Kickstart with a static interface

[CLOSE Dave]

I wrote:

> I want to kickstart a laptop with (of course) just one Ethernet
> interface. I can make it DHCP during the kickstart but I need it to end
> up as a static interface after installation. Is that possible? How?

I should add that the static address I need after installation is 
private, not routeable, and can't reach the installation repositories.
-- 
Dave Close
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Kickstart with a static interface

[CLOSE Dave]

I want to kickstart a laptop with (of course) just one Ethernet 
interface. I can make it DHCP during the kickstart but I need it to end 
up as a static interface after installation. Is that possible? How?
-- 
Dave Close
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Kickstart dependency resolution

[CLOSE Dave]

I have a local mirror of Fedora 23, kept current nightly. In the updates 
mirror, there is a plasma-workspace-5.6.5-1.fc23.x86_64.rpm and a 
plasma-workspace-common-5.6.5-1.fc23.x86_64.rpm. There are no copies of 
the 5.6.4-1 RPMs.

Nonetheless, when I try to install to a particular machine, kickstart 
stops with a fatal error, "nothing provides plasma-workspace-common = 
5.6.4-1.fc23 needed by plasma-workspace-5.6.4-1.fc23.x86_64". (Yes, I am 
explicitly asking to install KDE, but not any specific versions.)

Normally, the repodata directory is cloned at the same time as the repo 
contents are copied from upstream. On the chance that something was 
wrong with those files, I manually ran createrepo against all the repos. 
Same problem.

How can I see where kickstart is getting the idea that it should install 
version 5.6.4-1?
-- 
Dave Close
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: F23 KDE stability issues

[CLOSE Dave]

On 06/14/16 09:33 PM, Tim wrote:

>> When I leave my desk, I lock the screen but I disable locking based on
>> inactivity. As long as this works, I'm happy.
>
> Obvious question:  Just a simple screen lock, or is there a screensaver
> running (some of them were terrible at crashing X)?
>
> I'd try a different screensaver, or screen locking program, just to see
> if that's the actual cause.

I'm using whatever program is invoked when screen locking is configured 
using KDE's System Settings (systemsettings5). I'll look into possible 
alternatives.

But I doubt that is the problem. Last night I left X running without 
locking the screen, just switching to a different virtual terminal 
instead to hide the situation. When I switched back to X this morning, 
the screen was blank except for a cursor and I could not get it working.

On 06/15/16 04:18 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:

 > There have been several threads about session management on the Fedora
 > KDE list. It may be more appropriate to post there.

Thanks. I 'll try that.
-- 
Dave Close
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

F23 KDE stability issues

[CLOSE Dave]

I'll be the first to admit that I don't use Fedora in a conventional 
way. But it suits me -- or it did until things started misbehaving a few 
weeks ago. Now I'm finally disgusted enough to write some notes and hope 
for good advice.

I run F23 with the KDE desktop in what used to be called runlevel 3. I 
delete rhgb and quiet from /etc/default/grub and start X using startx 
because I like to see what happens during boot. I hate systems that try 
to hide what is really happening. Once KDE is running, I use eight 
desktops with several windows on each one, most of them XTerms with 
active SSH sessions to other machines. When I leave my desk, I lock the 
screen but I disable locking based on inactivity. As long as this works, 
I'm happy.

But it doesn't work reliably for the last few weeks. If I'm away from my 
desk for more than a few minutes, the lock screen is frozen when I 
return. I can't unlock. I can switch to a different virtual terminal and 
kill X, but if I then try to restart X using startx again, it doesn't 
come up properly. No windows appear, no panels, and neither the keyboard 
nor the mouse do anything except move the cursor. I have to fall back to 
rebooting.

When I reboot and startx again, things start up as they should. Except 
that all my previous windows are on the first desktop, overlapping like 
crazy. Moving them where they should be is very annoying and tedious. I 
have to do this at least once per day, sometimes more often. It's not 
just a matter of rearranging the windows, I also have to re-establish 
all the SSH sessions. And, of course, any active commands that were 
running were terminated so I may have some clean-up to do, also.

My machine is completely up-to-date with the latest Fedora. Even the 
kernel is up-to-date due to the frequent reboots. The F23 was not an 
upgrade, it was originally installed fresh using the workstation image 
(but choosing KDE, not Gnome).
-- 
Dave Close
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

F23 kickstart stalls

[CLOSE Dave]

Trying to kickstart a Dell R630 with ten total Ethernet ports, I see 
this output.

Starting installer, one moment...
anaconda 23.19.10-1 for Fedora 23 started.
  * installation log files are stored in /tmp during the installation
  * shell is available on TTY2
  * when reporting a bug add logs from /tmp as separate text/plain 
attachments
18:03:37 Not asking for VNC because of an automated install
Starting automated 
install...

The dots continue "forever".

/tmp/ifcfg.log ends with a series of lines like this (where the last 
character varies from 0..9),

18:03:40:558 DEBUG ifcfg: IfcfFile.read 
/etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth?

/tmp/program.log ends with a series of lines like,

18:03:38.616 DEBUG program: Return code: 0
18:03:38.619 INFO program: Running... udevadm settle --timeout=300

The files in /tmp are not growing though it has been more than 20 
minutes since the process started. On some attempts, the dots continue 
all night. Other identical machines have been successfully installed 
using the exact same procedure.

Does anyone know the possible cause of this issue?
-- 
Dave Close
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: F23 dracut can't find disk

[CLOSE Dave]

On 04/21/16 05:05 AM, Harald Hoyer wrote:

> If you change hardware or want to use the initramfs on another
> machine, it is easier to build a generic initramfs.
>
> The generic mode can be activated by:
> *-N, --no-hostonly
> Disable Host-Only mode
>
> or
>
> * hostonly=no
>in a dracut configuration file
>
> or
>
> * by installing the dracut-config-generic rpm

Wow, that's the biggest package I've ever installed! (Not!) But it does 
the trick. I confirm that a package built this way works as intended.
-- 
Dave Close
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: F23 dracut can't find disk

[CLOSE Dave]

I wrote:

> I have five machines which were fresh-installed with F23 back in
> February and all have been booted successfully a few times since.
> Today, booting of all of them fails in exactly the same way: dracut
> says it can't find the disk filesystems. The kernel boots as it
> should, and of course that comes from the disk, but then dracut comes
> along and says it can't find any of the filesystems. Not the root or
> home filesystems which are on LVM or the boot filesystem on a primary
> disk partition.
>
> Everything on the disk is ok. I've checked by booting Anaconda from
> a thumb drive and mounting manually. Anaconda troubleshooting mode
> says it can't find the filesystems either ("you have no Linux
> partitions"), but running vgchange -ay and a few mounts gets a proper
> chroot image.
>
> There must be something that is causing both dracut and Anaconda to
> fail to find the filesystems. I've tried following the instructions
> on , but
> that isn't helping:
>
> dracut:/# parted /dev/sda -s p
> sh: parted: command not found
> dracut:/# lvm vgscan
> File descriptor 98 (/dev/console) leaked on lvm invocation. Parent PID 2679: 
> sh
> File descriptor 99 (/dev/console) leaked on lvm invocation. Parent PID 2679: 
> sh
> Reading all physical volumes. This may take a while...
> dracut:/# lvm vgchange -ay
> File descriptor 98 (/dev/console) leaked on lvm invocation. Parent PID 2679: 
> sh
> File descriptor 99 (/dev/console) leaked on lvm invocation. Parent PID 2679: 
> sh
> dracut:/# blkid
> dracut:/#
>
> Note that when booted from the thumb drive, vgchange finds the LVM
> volumes just fine.

On 04/07/16 05:03 PM, Rick Stevens answered:

> Have you tried booting the previous kernel? It may be that the
> ramdisk for the new kernel is missing the LVM stuff for some reason.
> If the old kernel boots and finds things, bring it up and:
>
> dracut -f /boot/initramfs-.fc23.x86_64.img
> 
>
> where "" is the desired (new) kernel version. Then
> try the new kernel again. I've seen times where a new kernel install
> doesn't build a correct initramfs image. Never sorted out why, but
> I've used the above BFH on it and it seems to fix it (BFH = "big
> freaking hammer" for those who were curious).

Sorry it took me so long, Rick, but I did finally have a chance to try 
your suggestion. The new ramdisk created by the dracut command contained 
34 additional files that weren't in the original. Mostly stuff from 
/usr/lib/modules but also a few files from /usr/lib/firmware. Using the 
new ramdisk, the new kernel boots just like it should. So I can report 
that you have saved me. Thanks!

I suspect the problem comes from the fact that the machine on which the 
new kernel was built has a few differences from the one which would not 
boot. Both are x86_64 machines but the build machine does not have the 
Broadcom Ethernet ports that are in the target. Those were the firmware 
files missing. There is probably some way I can tweak the build to 
insure these files are initially included.
-- 
Dave Close
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: F23 dracut can't find disk

[CLOSE Dave]

On 04/07/16 05:56 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:

> Glad to help. Did the rebuild of the ramdisk work? Are you running
> the new kernel? Just curious as this may happen on the next update,
> too.

I hope to have time for that tomorrow.
-- 
Dave Close
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: F23 dracut can't find disk

[CLOSE Dave]

I wrote:

> I have five machines which were fresh-installed with F23 back in
> February and all have been booted successfully a few times since.
> Today, booting of all of them fails in exactly the same way: dracut
> says it can't find the disk filesystems. The kernel boots as it
> should, and of course that comes from the disk, but then dracut comes
> along and says it can't find any of the filesystems. Not the root or
> home filesystems which are on LVM or the boot filesystem on a primary
> disk partition.
>
> Everything on the disk is ok. I've checked by booting Anaconda from
> a thumb drive and mounting manually. Anaconda troubleshooting mode
> says it can't find the filesystems either ("you have no Linux
> partitions"), but running vgchange -ay and a few mounts gets a proper
> chroot image.
>
> There must be something that is causing both dracut and Anaconda to
> fail to find the filesystems. I've tried following the instructions
> on , but
> that isn't helping:
>
> dracut:/# parted /dev/sda -s p
> sh: parted: command not found
> dracut:/# lvm vgscan
> File descriptor 98 (/dev/console) leaked on lvm invocation. Parent PID 2679: 
> sh
> File descriptor 99 (/dev/console) leaked on lvm invocation. Parent PID 2679: 
> sh
> Reading all physical volumes. This may take a while...
> dracut:/# lvm vgchange -ay
> File descriptor 98 (/dev/console) leaked on lvm invocation. Parent PID 2679: 
> sh
> File descriptor 99 (/dev/console) leaked on lvm invocation. Parent PID 2679: 
> sh
> dracut:/# blkid
> dracut:/#
>
> Note that when booted from the thumb drive, vgchange finds the LVM
> volumes just fine.

On 04/07/16 05:03 PM, Rick Stevens answered:

> Have you tried booting the previous kernel? It may be that the
> ramdisk for the new kernel is missing the LVM stuff for some reason.
> If the old kernel boots and finds things, bring it up and:
>
> dracut -f /boot/initramfs-.fc23.x86_64.img
> 
>
> where "" is the desired (new) kernel version. Then
> try the new kernel again. I've seen times where a new kernel install
> doesn't build a correct initramfs image. Never sorted out why, but
> I've used the above BFH on it and it seems to fix it (BFH = "big
> freaking hammer" for those who were curious).

An excellent suggestion, Rick. Thanks. Indeed, there was a new kernel 
installed on these machines. Forcing the previous one works.

That doesn't explain why Anaconda also couldn't find things. But that's 
not a concern now that boot works for me. Thanks, again!
-- 
Dave Close
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

F23 dracut can't find disk

[CLOSE Dave]

I have five machines which were fresh-installed with F23 back in 
February and all have been booted successfully a few times since. Today, 
booting of all of them fails in exactly the same way: dracut says it 
can't find the disk filesystems. The kernel boots as it should, and of 
course that comes from the disk, but then dracut comes along and says it 
can't find any of the filesystems. Not the root or home filesystems 
which are on LVM or the boot filesystem on a primary disk partition.

Everything on the disk is ok. I've checked by booting Anaconda from a 
thumb drive and mounting manually. Anaconda troubleshooting mode says it 
can't find the filesystems either ("you have no Linux partitions"), but 
running vgchange -ay and a few mounts gets a proper chroot image.

There must be something that is causing both dracut and Anaconda to fail 
to find the filesystems. I've tried following the instructions on 
, but that 
isn't helping:

dracut:/# parted /dev/sda -s p
sh: parted: command not found
dracut:/# lvm vgscan
File descriptor 98 (/dev/console) leaked on lvm invocation. Parent PID 
2679: sh
File descriptor 99 (/dev/console) leaked on lvm invocation. Parent PID 
2679: sh
   Reading all physical volumes. This may take a while...
dracut:/# lvm vgchange -ay
File descriptor 98 (/dev/console) leaked on lvm invocation. Parent PID 
2679: sh
File descriptor 99 (/dev/console) leaked on lvm invocation. Parent PID 
2679: sh
dracut:/# blkid
dracut:/#

Note that when booted from the thumb drive, vgchange finds the LVM 
volumes just fine.
-- 
Dave Close
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: DNF is a time waster

[CLOSE Dave]

Several folks have responded that they don't see the same behavior I do. 
I don't doubt that. Even for me, the behavior is erratic, sometimes very 
slow, sometimes not.

The specific instance which prompted my note was an attempt to install 
from a local RPM file, not even from a repository. The machine in 
question is configured so that most repositories, and all non-local 
repos, are disabled by default anyway. The dnf.conf file says (just the 
default),

[main]
gpgcheck=1
installonly_limit=3
clean_requirements_on_remove=True
-- 
Dave Close
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

DNF is a time waster

[CLOSE Dave]

If I run something like, "dnf -y install ", and  is already 
installed, DNF gives a response like the following.

Last metadata expiration check performed 0:00:02 ago on ...
Package  is already installed, skipping.
  ... (long delay, sometimes several minutes) ...
Dependencies resolved.
Nothing to do.
Complete!

That is, it works but it takes an unreasonably long time to do so. How 
can it be that, DNF knows the package is already installed and /still/ 
takes such a long time to decide that dependencies are ok? There aren't 
any dependencies to resolve!
-- 
Dave Close
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: Installing F23 WS on Dell Inspiron 17 (5758)

[CLOSE Dave]

Ted Roche wrote:

> Could you plug in a mouse?

Ah, that's too simple! I'm embarrassed. Of course that works.

But I standby my complaints about how it doesn't work to do it using the 
keyboard. Because the selected buttons are not clearly indicated and are 
not arranged in a predictable sequence.
-- 
Dave Close
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Installing F23 WS on Dell Inspiron 17 (5758)

[CLOSE Dave]

Using the F23 workstation net install ISO, installation is nearly 
impossible because the touchpad is not working and the selected buttons 
are not clearly indicated. The touchpad works in the BIOS.

I'd be happy to solve this issue after installation if I could get that 
done. But using TAB etc to navigate is difficult since the selected 
buttons are not marked clearly. Even that would be ok if I could 
properly anticipate button sequence and just count TABs, but the 
sequence seems erratic. I usually hit the wrong buttons.

There must be some boot option switch to correct this issue. Is there?
-- 
Dave Close
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: Virtual consoles (was desktops) on F23 server edition

[CLOSE Dave]

Rick Stevens wrote:

>> So my vconsoles are properly configured and work correctly outside of X.
>> While X is running, if I press CTRL-ALT-F2, for example, the F2 vconsole
>> does not start and the X display remains. However, X is stuck; keyboard
>> or mouse input does not work. Remote access via SSH continues to work
>> but the console is effectively dead. If I logout of X (without trying to
>> start any vconsole), the logout works but no login prompt appears.
>> Again, the console is effectively dead.

> Wow. Uhm, since ssh works, have you used it to crawl around in the logs
> to see if something weird is going on?

I have to correct my statement above. SSH does not work after this lock 
up and an active SSH session stops just like the console. After reboot, 
I can't find anything useful in the logs.
-- 
Dave Close
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: Virtual consoles (was desktops) on F23 server edition

[CLOSE Dave]

Rick Stevens wrote:

> tty2-6 will not be started unless you try to use them (e.g. the getty
> on tty2 will only start if you use ALT-F2 from a console screen or
> CTRL-ALT-F2 from the desktop). Once they're started, however, they
> continue to run.

I fully understand this. I now believe the problem is only indirectly 
related to virtual consoles. If I start the machine in multi-user mode 
(runlevel 3), the vconsoles work as expected. Only when running under X 
(via startx or graphical mode) do they fail.

So my vconsoles are properly configured and work correctly outside of X. 
While X is running, if I press CTRL-ALT-F2, for example, the F2 vconsole 
does not start and the X display remains. However, X is stuck; keyboard 
or mouse input does not work. Remote access via SSH continues to work 
but the console is effectively dead. If I logout of X (without trying to 
start any vconsole), the logout works but no login prompt appears. 
Again, the console is effectively dead.

I've also seen some possibly related issues. I generally configure X so 
that SHIFT-CTRL-TAB goes to the previous desktop. On F23, that 
combination is ignored. CTRL-TAB to go to the next desktop works. I also 
configure X so that a left mouse click outside any window should bring 
up an application launcher. Again, that input is ignored. Right and 
middle click actions work as expected. These problems occur even on 
systems where the vconsoles and logout work correctly. Those systems 
were upgraded to F23 rather than installed from scratch.

If it matters, all these systems are using KDE, not Gnome.
-- 
Dave Close
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: Virtual desktops on F23 server edition

[CLOSE Dave]

stan wrote:

> Run  systemctl -a -t service
> and search the output for tty.  It's less, so /tty will do it.  There
> should be a service running for each getty.

# systemctl -a -t service | grep tty
   getty@tty1.service 
  loadedinactive deadGetty on tty1

> If there isn't, run  journalctl -r
> and search the output for tty.  The -r puts things in reverse order, so
> you will find the last mention of tty by the system.  It is also less,
> so /tty will work.  If something went wrong, this should tell you what.

All lines since the last boot... (journalctl -r --no-pager | grep tty)

Feb 17 11:08:43 pses23top polkitd[740]: Registered Authentication Agent 
for unix-process:4254:7165877 (system bus name :1.5981 
[/usr/bin/pkttyagent --notify-fd 5 --fallback], object path 
/org/freedesktop/PolicyKit1/AuthenticationAgent, locale en_US.UTF-8)
Feb 16 15:14:27 pses23top kernel: 00:05: ttyS0 at I/O 0x3f8 (irq = 4, 
base_baud = 115200) is a 16550A
Feb 16 15:14:27 pses23top kernel: 00:04: ttyS1 at I/O 0x2f8 (irq = 3, 
base_baud = 115200) is a 16550A
Feb 16 15:14:27 pses23top kernel: console [tty0] enabled
-- 
Dave Close, Thales Avionics, Irvine California USA.
cell +1 949 394 2124, dave.cl...@us.thalesgroup.com

"Technology has the shelf life of a banana." - Scott McNealy
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: Virtual desktops on F23 server edition

[CLOSE Dave]

I wrote:

> My file is identical to the default except,
>
>NAutoVTs=6 # same as default
>ReserveVT=6# same as default
>LidSwitchIgnoreInhibited=yes

Hit send to quickly. That last should be "LidSwitchIgnoreInhibited=no".
-- 
Dave Close, Thales Avionics, Irvine California USA.
cell +1 949 394 2124, dave.cl...@us.thalesgroup.com

"Technology has the shelf life of a banana." - Scott McNealy
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: Virtual desktops on F23 server edition

[CLOSE Dave]

stan wrote:

>> I don't seem to have any virtual desktops available after a fresh
>> installation of F23 server edition. What am I missing?

> Do you have the following files on your system?
> /usr/lib/systemd/system-generators/systemd-getty-generator
> /usr/lib/systemd/system/console-getty.service
> /usr/lib/systemd/system/container-getty@.service
> /usr/lib/systemd/system/getty.target
> /usr/lib/systemd/system/getty@.service
> /usr/lib/systemd/system/multi-user.target.wants/getty.target
> /usr/share/man/man8/systemd-getty-generator.8.gz
> /etc/systemd/logind.conf

I have all those files, which are part of the systemd package.

> The last file contains the defaults that systemd uses when generating
> gettys.

My file is identical to the default except,

  NAutoVTs=6# same as default
  ReserveVT=6   # same as default
  LidSwitchIgnoreInhibited=yes

> You could just do a
> dnf reinstall systemd
> on your system.  Something must have gone really wrong for virtual
> consoles to be missing.

Trying that soon.
-- 
Dave Close
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: Virtual desktops on F23 server edition

[CLOSE Dave]

On 02/24/16 02:45 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:

> Virtual desktops are normally a part of a GUI, which isn't part of the
> default installation for the server edition.  Do you mean that you don't
> have the alternate text consoles that should be available?

Yes. Sorry for the terminology confusion.
-- 
Dave Close
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Virtual desktops on F23 server edition

[CLOSE Dave]

I don't seem to have any virtual desktops available after a fresh 
installation of F23 server edition. What am I missing?
-- 
Dave Close
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

FW: Firefox 44 on Fedora 23 won't start

[CLOSE Dave]

 -Original Message-
From:   CLOSE Dave
Sent:   Thursday, February 18, 2016 06:17 PM Pacific Standard Time
To: support-fire...@lists.mozilla.org
Subject:Re: Firefox 44 on Fedora 23 won't start

I wrote:

> A fresh installation of Firefox 44 on a fresh installation of Fedora
> 23 server edition. All packages installed directly from the Fedora
> repos. According to dnf, there are no missing dependencies. I see the
> same behavior on about 25 new machines.
>
> Starting Firefox from an icon shows an entry in the panel for a few
> seconds, then nothing. Starting it from the command line in a shell
> window returns a new prompt after a few seconds. The exit code is
> zero and there is nothing recorded in syslog or the systemd journal.
> No Firefox window ever appears.
>
> I've also tried adding the -preferences and/or -private switches
> with the same result. The only thing I see strange is a new file in
> the saved-telemetry-pings directory each time I try to start Firefox.
> If FF is trying to use telemetry by default before I get a chance to
> disable it, FF will fail because it will never get through the
> proxy.

Additional information. I have one machine where FF works. This is also
running Fedora 23 but was installed from the live DVD rather than using
PXE as were those which are failing. It has FF 42 rather than FF 44.
Thus far, I've tried these remedies without success.

* Downgrade FF to 42 on a failing machine.

* Compare the list of packages installed on both machines and install on
the failing machine any which were previously only on the working one.
(In fact, the working machine has several hundred /fewer/ packages
installed but had a few extra ones as well.

* Per tjoen's suggestion, verified that both machines have NSS installed
and configured identically. Neither is using LDAP.

In all cases, FF exits with a zero status. I've run both the working and
failing copies under strace and compared the output (there's a lot of
output!). Certainly there are differences but nothing stands out as an
indicator of the problem.

There must be some way to get FF to tell me why it is failing!
-- 
Dave Close
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

error setting up base repository

[CLOSE Dave]

The subject message sometimes appears on the installation source entry 
from anaconda. But I have never been able to find a good way to learn 
just what the error is. Sure, sometimes it's obvious: the URL is wrong. 
But other times everything seems to be correct but still the error 
persists. I'm looking for a checklist of possible causes or a log entry 
that corresponds to the problem.

In my present effort, I'm attempting to use a local mirror of the 
fedora-updates repository (in addition to local mirrors of the fedora 
and other repositories). I believe the mirror is correct and complete. 
The machine being installed has no trouble accessing the repo from an F2 
shell while anaconda is running. Looking through the anaconda logs, I 
find lots of references to the update repository but no errors.

What can cause this error message? And how do I find out what caused it 
in this instance?
-- 
Dave Close
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: PXE Fedora 23 with Anaconda 20?

[CLOSE Dave]

I wrote:

> I've been trying to get a new working PXE installation for F23 and it
> isn't working. I just noticed what might be the problem. Although
> I downloaded the vmlinuz and initrd.img from the F23 server
> version archive, when the installation starts it shows F20 in the
> upper-right and checking via Alt-F2 shows that it is Anaconda v20
> that's running. What could be responsible for that? What part of my
> PXE configuration might be wrong?

It turns out that the PXE entry (tftp) includes three elements, vmlinuz, 
initrd, and inst.repo. This despite the fact that the kickstart file 
also includes the installation repo reference in the "url" entry. In 
this cases, the inst.repo was wrong.

I find it strange that the design requires the same reference in two 
places (inst.repo and url) and doesn't verify they are the same.
-- 
Dave Close
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

F23 PXE strange failure

[CLOSE Dave]

I'm working with a new PXE configuration file which may certainly 
contain some errors. Usually, it terminates with a "pane dead". But 
after the latest modification, it terminated by going to the Dracut 
emergency shell. In itself, that might help me, even though thus far I 
haven't found my error in the logs. But I did find something that seems 
quite strange to me and would like any available feedback.

Inside the Dracut shell, I ran the journalctl command. As this was a 
server in a remote data center, I couldn't easily attach a thumb drive 
and save the result. But here are the last few lines output.

Jan 19 20:35:52 localhost dracut-initqueue[812]: Starting dhcp for 
interface eth0
Jan 19 20:35:52 localhost dracut-initqueue[812]: dhcp: PREINIT eth0 up
Jan 19 20:35:52 localhost dhclient[1041]: Created duid 
\000\001\000\001\03612\250\260\203\376\341\211.
Jan 19 20:35:52 localhost dhclient[1041]: DHCPDISCOVER on eth0 to 
255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 8 (xid=0x45a50c20)
Jan 19 20:36:00 localhost dhclient[1041]: DHCPDISCOVER on eth0 to 
255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 18 (xid=0x45a50c20)
Jan 19 20:36:18 localhost dhclient[1041]: DHCPDISCOVER on eth0 to 
255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 8 (xid=0x45a50c20)
Jan 19 20:36:26 localhost dhclient[1041]: DHCPDISCOVER on eth0 to 
255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 15 (xid=0x45a50c20)
Jan 19 20:36:41 localhost dhclient[1041]: DHCPDISCOVER on eth0 to 
255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 12 (xid=0x45a50c20)
Jan 19 20:36:53 localhost dhclient[1041]: No DHCPOFFERS received.
Jan 19 20:36:53 localhost cracut-initqueue[812]: dhcp failed
Jan 19 20:36:59 localhost kernel: random: nonblocking pool is initialized
Jan 19 20:40:01 localhost dracut-initqueue[812]: Warning: Could not boot.
Jan 19 20:40:01 localhost systemd[1]: Received SIGRTMIN+20 from PID 823 
(plymouthd).
Jan 19 20:40:01 localhost dracut-initqueue[812]: Warning: /dev/root does 
not exi
st
Jan 19 20:40:01 localhost systemd[1]: Starting Dracut Emergency Shell...

Ok, so the PXE startup doesn't think it was able to get an IP address. 
But when I look at the DHCP server, it did get an address! The times 
from journalctl are UTC and those from the DHCP log are local PST 
(-0800) but the times otherwise match up quite well. Here's what the 
DHCP log shows.

Jan 19 12:34:52 us02linuxdhcp01p dhcpd[8500]: DHCPDISCOVER from 
b0:83:fe:e1:cc:89 via 10.76.148.1
Jan 19 12:34:53 us02linuxdhcp01p dhcpd[8500]: DHCPOFFER on 10.76.148.243 
to b0:83:fe:e1:cc:89 via 10.76.148.1
Jan 19 12:34:57 us02linuxdhcp01p dhcpd[8500]: DHCPREQUEST for 
10.76.148.243 (10.76.140.72) from b0:83:fe:e1:cc:89 via 10.76.148.1
Jan 19 12:34:57 us02linuxdhcp01p dhcpd[8500]: DHCPACK on 10.76.148.243 
to b0:83:fe:e1:cc:89 via 10.76.148.1
Jan 19 12:36:01 us02linuxdhcp01p dhcpd[8500]: DHCPDISCOVER from 
b0:83:fe:e1:cc:89 via 10.76.148.1: network 10.76.148.0/23: no free leases
Jan 19 12:36:18 us02linuxdhcp01p dhcpd[8500]: DHCPDISCOVER from 
b0:83:fe:e1:cc:89 via 10.76.148.1: network 10.76.148.0/23: no free leases
Jan 19 12:36:26 us02linuxdhcp01p dhcpd[8500]: DHCPDISCOVER from 
b0:83:fe:e1:cc:89 via 10.76.148.1: network 10.76.148.0/23: no free leases
Jan 19 12:36:42 us02linuxdhcp01p dhcpd[8500]: DHCPDISCOVER from 
b0:83:fe:e1:cc:89 via 10.76.148.1: network 10.76.148.0/23: no free leases

Not only was an OFFER sent in response to the first REQUEST, it appears 
that the OFFER was accepted by the client. Still the client sent four 
additional REQUESTs and didn't record the result of the acceptance. How 
can this be?
-- 
Dave Close
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: Fedora 22 - Change login screen resolution?

[CLOSE Dave]

CS DBA wrote:

> I'm playing around with Fedora 22 (KDE spin) on a macbook pro retina. I
> can login and change the screen resolution and it stays permanent.
> However the login screen is still tiny, anyone know how to change /
> scale the resolution of the login screen?

I've got some systems with a rackmount KMM device that Fedora doesn't 
properly recognize. Without attention, the resolution is skewed so that 
both X and text consoles are unusable. But it was easily fixed by adding 
"video=1280x1024" to /etc/default/grub and by adding 
/etc/X11/xorg.conf.d/40-monitor.conf with content,

Section "Monitor"
   Identifier "VGA-0"
   Option "PreferredMode" "1280x1024"
EndSection
-- 
Dave Close
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Can't upgrade F21 to F22

[CLOSE Dave]

Output below. This has been repeated all day. Any thoughts?

[root@dsusim ~]# cat /etc/fedora-release
Fedora release 21 (Twenty One)

[root@dsusim ~]# fedup --clean
resetting bootloader config
removing boot images
removing downloaded packages
removing miscellaneous files

[root@dsusim ~]# yum update
Loaded plugins: langpacks
No packages marked for update

[root@dsusim ~]# fedup --network 22
setting up repos...
default-installrepo/metalink|  14 kB  00:00
default-installrepo | 3.6 kB  00:00
default-installrepo/group_gz| 106 kB  00:04
default-installrepo/primary_db  | 1.4 MB  00:37
fedora/22/x86_64/metalink   |  14 kB  00:00
fedora/22/x86_64| 3.8 kB  00:00
fedora/22/x86_64/group_gz   | 230 kB  00:03
fedora/22/x86_64/primary_db |  18 MB  07:45
google-chrome   |  951 B  00:00
google-chrome/primary   | 1.8 kB  00:00
rpmfusion-free/22/x86_64| 3.0 kB  00:00
rpmfusion-free/22/x86_64/primary_db | 337 kB  00:04
rpmfusion-free-updates/22/x86_64| 3.0 kB  00:00
rpmfusion-free-updates/22/x86_64/primary_db |  70 kB  00:02
rpmfusion-nonfree/22/x86_64 | 3.0 kB  00:00
rpmfusion-nonfree/22/x86_64/primary_db  | 101 kB  00:01
rpmfusion-nonfree-updates/22/x86_64 | 3.0 kB  00:00
rpmfusion-nonfree-updates/22/x86_64/primary_db  |  29 kB  00:00
updates/22/x86_64/metalink  |  13 kB  00:00
updates/22/x86_64   | 4.7 kB  00:00
updates/22/x86_64/group_gz  | 230 kB  00:01
updates/22/x86_64/updateinfo| 814 kB  00:17
updates/22/x86_64/primary_db| 6.9 MB  02:32
getting boot images...
.treeinfo.signed| 2.0 kB  00:00

Downloading failed: couldn't get boot images: No more mirrors to try.
Last error was: [Errno 14] HTTP Error 503 - Service Unavailable

Debuglog shows that fedup tried at least 34 systems.
-- 
Dave Close
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

reposync for two Fedora versions

[CLOSE Dave]

I've been running reposync successfully for Fedora 20 for months. Now 
I'd like to repeat the process for Fedora 21 while continuing to take 
updates for F20 on the same machine. But it isn't working for me.

/usr/bin/reposync -n -a x86_64 -r fedora21 -p /data/yum-mirrors/x86_64
Error setting up repositories: no such table: packages

The exact same command works perfectly if I substitute fedora20. Both 
are described in my .repo files exactly the same way.

Looking around, I see that most references to this error, not for 
reposync but for other YUM commands, state that the solution is to clean 
the RPM data base. I've done that. I've even re-created it from scratch. 
I still get the same error.

Any other ideas?
-- 
Dave Close
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: Anaconda illegal address

[CLOSE Dave]

Joe Zeff wrote:

> Closing a bug as a duplicate isn't saying that it's not a bug.  It means
> that the bug's already been reported, and that it's a waste of resources
> keeping two versions of the report open.

But it does mean that when the referenced report has already been closed 
and marked NOTABUG.
-- 
Dave Close
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: Anaconda illegal address

[CLOSE Dave]

I wrote:

> I will now open two BZ reports:
>
> 1. Anaconda should fail with a useful message when a required address
> is missing.

My report has now been closed, marked as a duplicate of BZ 1178320. That
means at least one developer thinks providing a useless error message is
not a bug. I strongly disagree.
-- 
Dave Close
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: Anaconda illegal address

[CLOSE Dave]

Chris Murphy wrote:

> I mean, when there's a crash libreport should pop up and offer to file
> the bug for you. You need to enter bugzilla credentials and then it
> automatically files the bug details including uploading all files.
> Before it does this, it checks if a bug has already been filed with
> this mechanism so that there aren't duplicates filed. It'll tell you
> the URL for the found bug. You don't have to check, it does it for
> you. If you go to the that bug URL there might be a suggestion how to
> work around it.

No, that doesn't work. There is no provision in the libreport popup for 
passing through a proxy.

> It's a crash. If there isn't already a bug filed then I'd definitely
> say you've hit an edge case.

I agree it's a bug. However, it isn't the bug I originally thought. When 
searching, I had missed BZ 1178320. That report has been closed as 
NOTABUG although it is exactly my issue. I will now open two BZ reports:

1. Anaconda should fail with a useful message when a required address is 
missing.

2. Anaconda should not require --gateway or --nameserver for an 
interface with a static configuration. In my case, the static interface 
is secondary (it should not have a gateway) and DNS is already provided 
by the primary DHCP interface.
-- 
Dave Close, Thales Avionics, Irvine California USA.
cell +1 949 394 2124, dave.cl...@us.thalesgroup.com

"If a cluttered desk is a sign of a cluttered mind,
of what then is an empty desk?" --Albert Einstein
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: Anaconda illegal address

[CLOSE Dave]

Chris Murphy wrote:

>> When anaconda complains about an "illegal IP address string passed
>> to inet_aton", how can I discover what the bad string contains? So
>> far as I can see, all the configured addresses are perfectly valid.
>> Here's a copy of the traceback: .

> If you let the bug report dialog file this bug for you, it will
> check for duplicates and that bug might have a work around. Pretty
> much anytime the installer crashes like this rather than giving you
> a coherent error message (and failing gracefully) it's a bug.

I checked for reported bugs before filing my question. But I'm happy to
file a report anyway.

I agree that the behavior is not ideal. Still, if there is a clue
somewhere in the log files, I would have been happy to learn about it.
Based on the lack of response, I presume there is no such clue.
-- 
Dave Close
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Anaconda illegal address

[CLOSE Dave]

When anaconda complains about an "illegal IP address string passed to
inet_aton", how can I discover what the bad string contains? So far as I 
can see, all the configured addresses are perfectly valid. Here's a copy 
of the traceback: .
-- 
Dave Close, Thales Avionics, Irvine California USA.
cell +1 949 394 2124, dave.cl...@us.thalesgroup.com

"If a cluttered desk is a sign of a cluttered mind,
of what then is an empty desk?" --Albert Einstein
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: Two independent SSHD processes?

[CLOSE Dave]

Ed Greshko wrote:

> You probably will want to follow this procedure in F21
> https://access.redhat.com/solutions/1166283

Thanks. That works perfectly in F20.

So we appear to have confirmed that the default installation is broken 
in SysV versions (mine are F13). The linked page points to another page 
with instructions for RHEL 5/6 that might work for earlier Fedora also. 
Unfortunately, the link doesn't work unless one has a Red Hat account.
-- 
Dave Close
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: Two independent SSHD processes?

[CLOSE Dave]

Ed Greshko wrote:

> Well, I don't "seem" to be telling you.  I'm actually showing you.
> :-) :-)

Yes, and thank you. But you didn't explicitly mention the version. In my
original note, I said I'd only tried SysV. Before I make the effort to
do it on systemd, I thought it would be worth asking for some confidence
that it will work. The SSHD man page implies that it won't work.

And, of course, support or not, I still need to find a solution for
older systems. Official support may not exist but many of us presume
community support, via mailing lists, continues.
-- 
Dave Close
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: Two independent SSHD processes?

[CLOSE Dave]

Ed Greshko wrote:

>> But if you read the SSHD man page and the /etc/rc.d/init.d/sshd script,
>> you'll find that the PID is always recorded at /var/run/sshd.pid and the
>> PidFile variable is only used for reporting status.

> And if you tried it?
>
> [root@meimei run]# grep pid /etc/ssh/sshd_config
> PidFile /var/run/sshd-meimei.pid
>
> [root@meimei run]# ls /var/run | grep sshd
> sshd-meimei.pid
>
> [root@meimei run]# cat /var/run/sshd-meimei.pid
> 16561
>
> [root@meimei run]# ps -eaf | grep 16561
> root 16561 1  0 09:48 ?00:00:00 /usr/sbin/sshd -D
>
> So..  Follow Rick's recommendation

I have tried it. At least on an earlier Fedora with SysV.

The specified PID file is NOT created. Service stop fails because the 
PID file is not found.

What you and others seem to be telling me is that the problem doesn't 
exist on systemd machines, even though the man page implies that it 
still works the same way. I'll try F21 soon.
-- 
Dave Close
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Re: Two independent SSHD processes?

[CLOSE Dave]

Ian Pilcher and others wrote:

> There is a "PidFile" option in the config file that can be used to
> control this.

But if you read the SSHD man page and the /etc/rc.d/init.d/sshd script, 
you'll find that the PID is always recorded at /var/run/sshd.pid and the 
PidFile variable is only used for reporting status.
-- 
Dave Close
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Two independent SSHD processes?

[CLOSE Dave]

I'd like to run two SSH daemons on the same machine. They will listen on 
different ports and have other differences in their configuration. I 
want these two daemons to be independent of each other: either can run 
while the other is stopped. I need to do this for recent (systemd) 
machines and for older ones (SysV).

I'm finding that, although the SSH daemon records its PID in a file, 
that file is not configurable. Consequently, it seems that stopping one 
of the daemons causes the other to also stop. Same for starting one.

Here is the procedure I'm using to setup the second daemon on SysV. (The 
first one is the standard daemon normally running. I haven't tried yet 
on systemd.)

cd /usr/sbin; ln -s sshd xsshd
cd /etc/pam.d; ln -s sshd xsshd
cp /etc/rc.d/init.d/sshd /etc/rc.d/init.d/xsshd
# edit /etc/rc.d/init.d/xsshd to reference a different config file
# and the new program name, xsshd
chkconfig --add xsshd

I realize that I might be able to workaround these difficulties, or some 
of them, by revising the standard system control files. I'd like to 
avoid doing that and just fit within the Fedora framework. Is that 
likely to be possible?
-- 
Dave Close
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org