Hmm, I also found this line in my log (this time it booted OK):
Jul 12 18:41:47 redacted.example.org ntpdate[2184]: name server cannot
be used: Temporary failure in name resolution (-3)
I'm wondering whether it's either
a) failing to start ntp because ntpdate isn't running because it
couldn't
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1575572 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1575572
I'm also seeing this still fail with init-system-helpers 1.29ubuntu2,
also suggesting this is not a duplicate of #1575572.
It does not seem to fail reliably, but for what it's worth this was a
clean
I can confirm that this can be fixed by carrying out the instructions
here: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=744304#32
(i.e. adding a small systemd file)
then:
systemctl enable bind9-resolvconf.service
then restarting bind9.
I don't think it should really be this opaque ...
This may explain it:
root@shed2:~# systemctl list-units --all | egrep 'bind9|resolv'
org.freedesktop.resolve1.busname
loadedinactive dead Network Name Resolution Service Bus
Name
systemd-networkd-resolvconf-update.path
Public bug reported:
Under 16.04, /etc/default/bind9 contains a RESOLVCONF option which
appears not to work with systemd.
Under 14.04, setting RESOLVCONF="yes" in /etc/default/bind9 caused bind9
to be installed as a local resolver. This is done by lines 65-68 of the
(16.04) /etc/init.d/bind9.
Public bug reported:
nbd-client 3.7 (shipped with 14.04) connects read-only to newer nbd
servers (3.9+, as well as gonbdserver and - probably - modern qemu).
The problem is described here:
https://www.mail-archive.com/nbd-general@lists.sourceforge.net/msg03878.html
In essence nbd-client pre
Bug 1337262 is lonely and unloved. By donating just five minutes of your
time, you can make a real difference to this bug's life, and kill it.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1337262
I know this isn't exactly urgent, but it is the world's simplest patch,
and is really quite useful if you are booting in an environment where
modules are on the boot disk.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
Thanks for everyone's work on this - much appreciated.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1366174
Title:
apache2 SEGV with multiple SSL sites
To manage notifications about this bug go
Thanks for everyone's work on this - much appreciated.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to the bug report.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1366174
Title:
apache2 SEGV with multiple SSL sites
To manage notifications
http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/pending-sru.html indicates
there is allegedly a regression in svn. Last build is here:
https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/trusty-adt-
subversion/lastBuild/ARCH=amd64,label=adt/ and indeed the build log
shows a failure here:
http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/pending-sru.html indicates
there is allegedly a regression in svn. Last build is here:
https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/trusty-adt-
subversion/lastBuild/ARCH=amd64,label=adt/ and indeed the build log
shows a failure here:
Thanks. Verified that this works with the original test cases, and
marked verification-done.
** Tags removed: verification-needed
** Tags added: verification-done
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
Thanks. Verified that this works with the original test cases, and
marked verification-done.
** Tags removed: verification-needed
** Tags added: verification-done
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to the bug report.
Thanks Robie.
If it helps, we have been running this patch on many tens of machines of
machines since early Nov 2014 (so approximately 4 months) without any
ill effects, with and without SSL (though we don't use stapling).
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Thanks Robie.
If it helps, we have been running this patch on many tens of machines of
machines since early Nov 2014 (so approximately 4 months) without any
ill effects, with and without SSL (though we don't use stapling).
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Any update on this one?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1366174
Title:
apache2 SEGV with multiple SSL sites
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
Any update on this one?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to the bug report.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1366174
Title:
apache2 SEGV with multiple SSL sites
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
Robie: can I ping you once more re the backport to trusty?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to the bug report.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1366174
Title:
apache2 SEGV with multiple SSL sites
To manage notifications
Robie: can I ping you once more re the backport to trusty?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1366174
Title:
apache2 SEGV with multiple SSL sites
To manage notifications about this bug
Robie: I've verified that the Vivid version works fine. Can I ping you
re getting the SRU done for Trusty?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to the bug report.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1366174
Title:
apache2 SEGV
Robie: I've verified that the Vivid version works fine. Can I ping you
re getting the SRU done for Trusty?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1366174
Title:
apache2 SEGV with multiple
Made this public as the links to which it refers are public.
** Information type changed from Private Security to Public Security
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to qemu in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1400775
Made this public as the links to which it refers are public.
** Information type changed from Private Security to Public Security
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1400775
Title:
Robie: this is me poking you after a couple of weeks, as requested.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to apache2 in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1366174
Title:
apache2 SEGV with multiple SSL sites
To manage
Robie: no apology needed, and yes I would be happy to check Vivid.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to the bug report.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1366174
Title:
apache2 SEGV with multiple SSL sites
To manage
Robie: this is me poking you after a couple of weeks, as requested.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1366174
Title:
apache2 SEGV with multiple SSL sites
To manage notifications about
Robie: no apology needed, and yes I would be happy to check Vivid.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1366174
Title:
apache2 SEGV with multiple SSL sites
To manage notifications about
I have added [Impact] and [Regression potential] sections.
Do the SRU requirements mean we need a patch for U too? I'm not sure
what current development release means right now given that U is out.
I believe the upstream 2.4.10 patch should apply straight to U. It's
upstream, so V will
I have added [Impact] and [Regression potential] sections.
Do the SRU requirements mean we need a patch for U too? I'm not sure
what current development release means right now given that U is out.
I believe the upstream 2.4.10 patch should apply straight to U. It's
upstream, so V will
I have attached a backport to 2.4.7 to this comment. This is a backport
of the backport to 2.4.x in upstream svn. More details in the commit
message.
This is a straight patch to the source (produced from git) rather than a
proper packaged up patch, if you see what I mean.
I've put this up on
I have attached a backport to 2.4.7 to this comment. This is a backport
of the backport to 2.4.x in upstream svn. More details in the commit
message.
This is a straight patch to the source (produced from git) rather than a
proper packaged up patch, if you see what I mean.
I've put this up on
This has now been merged into 2.4. See
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54357
Any chance this can now be backported to Trusty? The impact is pretty
severe.
** Bug watch added: Apache Software Foundation Bugzilla #54357
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54357
This has now been merged into 2.4. See
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54357
Any chance this can now be backported to Trusty? The impact is pretty
severe.
** Bug watch added: Apache Software Foundation Bugzilla #54357
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54357
The fix for this is now committed in trunk. A 2.4 backport is
available. See:
https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS?r1=1631030r2=1631029
Patch (per the above) at:
https://people.apache.org/~kbrand/mod_ssl-2.4.x-PR54357.diff
--
You received this bug notification
The fix for this is now committed in trunk. A 2.4 backport is
available. See:
https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS?r1=1631030r2=1631029
Patch (per the above) at:
https://people.apache.org/~kbrand/mod_ssl-2.4.x-PR54357.diff
--
You received this bug notification
Yes, we did talk on IRC :-)
As far as I can tell, utopic 2.4.10-1ubuntu1 does not build modident
(still). I suspect what might have been fixed in the debian bug my
report got merged into (https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-
bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=711925) is the constant removal of any module
called
Yep, though I think that was what https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-
bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=752922 asked for.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to apache2 in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/188
Title:
mod_ident no
Yes, we did talk on IRC :-)
As far as I can tell, utopic 2.4.10-1ubuntu1 does not build modident
(still). I suspect what might have been fixed in the debian bug my
report got merged into (https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-
bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=711925) is the constant removal of any module
called
Yep, though I think that was what https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-
bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=752922 asked for.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/188
Title:
mod_ident no longer included in
Robie: removing the reference to certinfo_free where
X509_get_ex_new_index is called within ssl_stapling_ex_init works around
the 2.4.10 bug at the expense of a memory leak. I haven't (yet) verified
this entirely fixes 2.4.7 though I suspect it will. I'll test that in a
bit.
Obviously this
I can confirm that the above workaround fixes 2.4.7, both my testcase
and our real world version. I attach a patch. This is probably 'better
than nothing'.
** Patch added: Patch to avoid calling certinfo_free (ugly workaround)
Robie: removing the reference to certinfo_free where
X509_get_ex_new_index is called within ssl_stapling_ex_init works around
the 2.4.10 bug at the expense of a memory leak. I haven't (yet) verified
this entirely fixes 2.4.7 though I suspect it will. I'll test that in a
bit.
Obviously this
I can confirm that the above workaround fixes 2.4.7, both my testcase
and our real world version. I attach a patch. This is probably 'better
than nothing'.
** Patch added: Patch to avoid calling certinfo_free (ugly workaround)
Robie: that attitude is quite understandable. I'm willing to do some work
bisecting it, but I fear the root problem is going to be that addressed this
commit:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revisionrevision=1573360
The ssl_pphrase_Handle routine is misleadingly named, and in fact is pretty
Turns out 2.4.10 also has the bug after all (it's just more difficult to
trigger). I think I have found the root cause. I've put details
upstream.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to apache2 in Ubuntu.
Robie: that attitude is quite understandable. I'm willing to do some work
bisecting it, but I fear the root problem is going to be that addressed this
commit:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revisionrevision=1573360
The ssl_pphrase_Handle routine is misleadingly named, and in fact is pretty
Turns out 2.4.10 also has the bug after all (it's just more difficult to
trigger). I think I have found the root cause. I've put details
upstream.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1366174
I think I've got about the minimal case for replication. Attached is a
tiny perl script which generates a number of SSL sites of the form:
VirtualHost 127.0.0.1:$port
ServerName 127.0.0.1:$port
SSLEngine on
SSLCertificateFile/etc/ssl/certs/ssl-cert-snakeoil.pem
Actually DBDriver pgsql causes the issue, but not DBDriver mysql,
and it can be outside the virtual host block. So I think this might be a
pgsql driver issue.
Reported upstream at:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56919
** Bug watch added: Apache Software Foundation Bugzilla
The number of sites required appears to vary. Also it appears to be
necessary to have mod php5 enabled.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to apache2 in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1366174
Title:
apache2 SEGV
I think I've got about the minimal case for replication. Attached is a
tiny perl script which generates a number of SSL sites of the form:
VirtualHost 127.0.0.1:$port
ServerName 127.0.0.1:$port
SSLEngine on
SSLCertificateFile/etc/ssl/certs/ssl-cert-snakeoil.pem
Actually DBDriver pgsql causes the issue, but not DBDriver mysql,
and it can be outside the virtual host block. So I think this might be a
pgsql driver issue.
Reported upstream at:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56919
** Bug watch added: Apache Software Foundation Bugzilla
The number of sites required appears to vary. Also it appears to be
necessary to have mod php5 enabled.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1366174
Title:
apache2 SEGV with multiple SSL
Public bug reported:
Apache2 crashes with multiple SSL sites.
When starting apache2 with multiple SSL sites I get a SEGV like this:
(gdb) bt
#0 0x705faaf3 in ?? () from /usr/lib/apache2/modules/mod_ssl.so
#1 0x729647a6 in int_free_ex_data (class_index=optimized out,
Public bug reported:
Apache2 crashes with multiple SSL sites.
When starting apache2 with multiple SSL sites I get a SEGV like this:
(gdb) bt
#0 0x705faaf3 in ?? () from /usr/lib/apache2/modules/mod_ssl.so
#1 0x729647a6 in int_free_ex_data (class_index=optimized out,
Public bug reported:
libxen-4.4 has no corresponding debug package with debugging symbols in.
** Affects: xen (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to xen in Ubuntu.
Public bug reported:
libxen-4.4 has no corresponding debug package with debugging symbols in.
** Affects: xen (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
This gets worse.
You can't even use your own mod_ident, because whenever apache2 is
upgraded, it runs this:
OBSOLETE_CONFFILES=...
/etc/apache2/mods-available/ident.load
...
...
if [ -n $2 ] || obsolete_conffile_exists ; then
prepare_rm_conffile
This gets worse.
You can't even use your own mod_ident, because whenever apache2 is
upgraded, it runs this:
OBSOLETE_CONFFILES=...
/etc/apache2/mods-available/ident.load
...
...
if [ -n $2 ] || obsolete_conffile_exists ; then
prepare_rm_conffile
This is pretty annoying. In a situation where you have many customer VMs
running on 12.04, and want to migrate them to a host running 14.04 (so
you can do a rolling OS upgrade), I'm afraid shut down all your
customer VMs and restart isn't really an option for obvious reasons.
Equally, installing
Looks like there is a patch here:
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/qemu.git/tree/0001-Fix-migration-from-qemu-kvm.patch?h=f20
but it's either take it (and break inbound migrates from quantal etc.)
or don't (and break inbound migrates from precise). Another possibility
(unhelpful for libvirt
This is pretty annoying. In a situation where you have many customer VMs
running on 12.04, and want to migrate them to a host running 14.04 (so
you can do a rolling OS upgrade), I'm afraid shut down all your
customer VMs and restart isn't really an option for obvious reasons.
Equally, installing
Looks like there is a patch here:
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/qemu.git/tree/0001-Fix-migration-from-qemu-kvm.patch?h=f20
but it's either take it (and break inbound migrates from quantal etc.)
or don't (and break inbound migrates from precise). Another possibility
(unhelpful for libvirt
Public bug reported:
kmod should permit use of compressed modules. This enables images that
boot from RAM to be much smaller. In essence this requires only changing
a build option. Uncompressed modules are still supported.
A patch is here:
gah this got filed under apache2 even though I said affects kmod. -
apologies all
** Package changed: apache2 (Ubuntu) = kmod (Ubuntu)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to apache2 in Ubuntu.
gah this got filed under apache2 even though I said affects kmod. -
apologies all
** Package changed: apache2 (Ubuntu) = kmod (Ubuntu)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1337262
Title:
Public bug reported:
kmod should permit use of compressed modules. This enables images that
boot from RAM to be much smaller. In essence this requires only changing
a build option. Uncompressed modules are still supported.
A patch is here:
Public bug reported:
mountall / Upstart handles /dev mounting badly on trusty (14.04) when no
initrd is used. This is a regression from Precise (12.04).
This bug occurs when an Ubuntu image is produced using debootstrap and a
separate initrd is not used. More precisely, I am using debootstrap
Reported to Debian:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=752922
** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #752922
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=752922
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to
Reported to Debian:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=752922
** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #752922
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=752922
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
Arguably the real fix to this is to configure apache with --reallyall
(compile everything), then perhaps put the more esoteric modules in a
secondary package (libapache2-mod-extra or something).
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is
Arguably the real fix to this is to configure apache with --reallyall
(compile everything), then perhaps put the more esoteric modules in a
secondary package (libapache2-mod-extra or something).
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to
Public bug reported:
Precise included mod_ident in apache2.2. Trusty does not include
mod_ident in apache2.4. There appears to be no other package containing
mod_ident.so. Therefore an upgrade between Precise (LTS) and Trusty
(LTS) will unfixably break anything using mod_ident.
This affects me
The attached patch appear to result in it building, and being able to be
inserted as a module.
root@trustytest:/home/ubuntu/apache2/apache2-2.4.7# for i in ../*.deb ; do echo
$i ; dpkg -c $i | fgrep ident ; done
../apache2_2.4.7-1ubuntu4_amd64.deb
-rw-r--r-- root/root62 2014-06-23 20:00
If you prefer this as a separate module, this would appear to compile and load
as a module:
https://github.com/abligh/libapache-mod-ident
Direction on which you would prefer would be useful and I will get
testing.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Public bug reported:
Precise included mod_ident in apache2.2. Trusty does not include
mod_ident in apache2.4. There appears to be no other package containing
mod_ident.so. Therefore an upgrade between Precise (LTS) and Trusty
(LTS) will unfixably break anything using mod_ident.
This affects me
The attached patch appear to result in it building, and being able to be
inserted as a module.
root@trustytest:/home/ubuntu/apache2/apache2-2.4.7# for i in ../*.deb ; do echo
$i ; dpkg -c $i | fgrep ident ; done
../apache2_2.4.7-1ubuntu4_amd64.deb
-rw-r--r-- root/root62 2014-06-23 20:00
If you prefer this as a separate module, this would appear to compile and load
as a module:
https://github.com/abligh/libapache-mod-ident
Direction on which you would prefer would be useful and I will get
testing.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs,
That's a shame, but thanks for the info.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to open-vm-tools in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1275656
Title:
open-vm-dkms 2011.12.20-562307-0ubuntu1: open-vm-tools kernel module
That's a shame, but thanks for the info.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1275656
Title:
open-vm-dkms 2011.12.20-562307-0ubuntu1: open-vm-tools kernel module
failed to build
To
Hi,
I tried to test this and couldn't get it to work, though I may have done
something stupid.
I run precise, and upgraded to the lts-trusty kernel. I then removed
open-vm-tools ( friends), and inserted the custom built precise
package.
That all worked fine, but I still can't mount vmhgfs as I
Further playing about suggests I need (somehow) vmware-hgfsclient, but
the package seems devoid of any documentation or manual pages.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to open-vm-tools in Ubuntu.
Hi,
I tried to test this and couldn't get it to work, though I may have done
something stupid.
I run precise, and upgraded to the lts-trusty kernel. I then removed
open-vm-tools ( friends), and inserted the custom built precise
package.
That all worked fine, but I still can't mount vmhgfs as I
Further playing about suggests I need (somehow) vmware-hgfsclient, but
the package seems devoid of any documentation or manual pages.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1275656
Title:
** Also affects: cloud-init (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to cloud-init in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1068756
Title:
IPv6 Privacy Extensions enabled on
Neil: the metadata is just one example (though that's not happening).
The firewall rule thing applies irrespective of the metadata. The cloud
environment created requires only /128 addresses it knows about to be
accessible, and firewalls everything else out. Reasons for this include
prevention of
This affects 14.04 too
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to cloud-init in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1068756
Title:
IPv6 Privacy Extensions enabled on Ubuntu Server by default
To manage notifications about
That doesn't work if (for instance) you have 2 machines on the same SDN
virtual LAN, which is a /64, and you want to prevent source spoofing
between them. For avoidance of doubt, we do use /64s.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is
In my view this is NOT a software bug, its an OS bug.
Here's a completely different why this causes problems.
We use Ubuntu UEC images. There are no meaningful privacy considerations
here because we generate both the MAC address and the IP address of the
servers concerned. IE, if the machine is
** Also affects: cloud-init (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1068756
Title:
IPv6 Privacy Extensions enabled on Ubuntu Server by
Neil: the metadata is just one example (though that's not happening).
The firewall rule thing applies irrespective of the metadata. The cloud
environment created requires only /128 addresses it knows about to be
accessible, and firewalls everything else out. Reasons for this include
prevention of
That doesn't work if (for instance) you have 2 machines on the same SDN
virtual LAN, which is a /64, and you want to prevent source spoofing
between them. For avoidance of doubt, we do use /64s.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to
This affects 14.04 too
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1068756
Title:
IPv6 Privacy Extensions enabled on Ubuntu Server by default
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
Any news on the fix being released for Lucid?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1295987
Title:
openjdk6 regression causes finalizers never to be called
To manage notifications about
Jamie: any news on this one?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1295987
Title:
openjdk6 regression causes finalizers never to be called
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
I can confirm the Precise packages passed our torture tests over the
weekend. These are good to go as far as I am concerned.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1295987
Title:
openjdk6
48 hours of testing show no problems with these packages, whereas the
previously released packages show leaks. We will continue to run these
tests over the weekend, but it's looking good for us so far.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
Will do once they have finished building. Is there a link to the diff in
the mean time so I can check it against the one we've been using?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1295987
Title:
Jamie: thanks. They look good to me (from inspection of the diffs). Will
get these checked tomorrow once they have built. Normally our tests take
a couple of days to run.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
1 - 100 of 308 matches
Mail list logo
