[Bug 1945874] Re: 21.10 beta, errors in 10-linux and 10_linux_zfs

2022-04-15 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
A quick update, I might get a chance to dig into this again. I recently noted that the issue persists in 22.04, via the beta installer. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1945874 Title:

[Bug 1945874] Re: 21.10 beta, errors in 10-linux and 10_linux_zfs

2021-11-18 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
I haven't had a chance to dig deeper, but I just noticed this same issue in Focal Fossa. If I get a chance to debug this I'll submit a patch here. I might get a chance over the next week, during Thanksgiving break. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs,

[Bug 1906476] Re: PANIC at zfs_znode.c:335:zfs_znode_sa_init() // VERIFY(0 == sa_handle_get_from_db(zfsvfs->z_os, db, zp, SA_HDL_SHARED, &zp->z_sa_hdl)) failed

2021-10-27 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
(Or Ubuntu systems post-fix but with pools created while the bug was active - and is there a fix possible, or is it "make a new pool"? Is there a diagnostic possible to be sure either way?) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubunt

[Bug 1945874] Re: 21.10 beta, errors in 10-linux and 10_linux_zfs

2021-10-07 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
Didier, That part didn't strike me as exceptional because the pool's already mounted, since we're running update-grub from the running system. It's not available to be listed or imported again. I'll want to read 10_linux_zfs in depth to see what it's doing, but if it's depending on a list to com

[Bug 1945874] Re: 21.10 beta, errors in 10-linux and 10_linux_zfs

2021-10-04 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
A quick test shows the issue not cropping up if I use an install with inherited mountpoints in a more standard hierarchy. I haven't checked out what's different. tank/var/log /var/log zfs defaults 0 0 tank/tmp /tmp zfs defaults 0 0 /dev/md0 /boot ext4 defaults 0 1 /dev/mapper/swap none swap sw 0

[Bug 1945874] Re: 21.10 beta, errors in 10-linux and 10_linux_zfs

2021-10-04 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
Sure. This is a mode I've been using lately where I'm using legacy mountpoints on datasets out of fstab. I suspect this would do the same thing with a traditional inherited mount hierarchy. # cat /etc/fstab tank/zroot / zfs defaults 0 0 tank/home /home zfs defaults 0 0 tank/usr/src /usr/src zf

[Bug 1945873] Re: vt.handoff=7 ~broken on VM

2021-10-04 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
Quick note, removing "splash" from the kernel command line mitigates the issue. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1945873 Title: vt.handoff=7 ~broken on VM To manage notifications about

[Bug 1945873] Re: vt.handoff=7 ~broken on VM

2021-10-04 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
I just installed Impish Indri on my Thinkpad T420 and the same issue cropped up. This is notable in that it is a UEFI install on real hardware. I'd expected this was a glitch that would only show up on VMs. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is

[Bug 1945873] Re: vt.handoff=7 ~broken on VM

2021-10-03 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
** Attachment added: "in case it's useful: dpkg -l | awk '{print $2,$3}' > packages" https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/1945873/+attachment/5530338/+files/packages -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.

[Bug 1945873] Re: vt.handoff=7 ~broken on VM

2021-10-03 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
I've been lax in exercising this stuff. I tend to stick to Ubuntu LTS hypervisors (hence hardware), and my VMs are often other systems. I only noticed this issue because I needed a VM test environment for the un- related ZFS root bug I was exploring. I haven't ruled out that it's an artifact of my

[Bug 1945874] Re: 21.10 beta, errors in 10-linux and 10_linux_zfs

2021-10-02 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
** Description changed: - In a custom install of Ubuntu 21.10 beta, both hardware and VM installs suffer from a bug in the grub.d/10_linux and 10_linux_zfs scripts. (For comparison, Debian Bullseye, running a similar version of grub, doesn't have this issue.) Unique to Ubuntu, there'

[Bug 1945873] Re: vt.handoff=7 ~broken on VM

2021-10-02 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
Additional detail in case it's useful: Hypervisor is Debian Buster, virt-manager, libvirt/KVM, default Spice display, default QXL video. Legacy install, so no efifb. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launch

[Bug 1945873] Re: vt.handoff=7 ~broken on VM

2021-10-02 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
** Description changed: - In an install made with 21.10 beta, the default settings add vt.handoff=7 - to the primary kernel command line in /boot/grub/grub.cfg. The effect of - this is that the virtual console is somewhat broken during boot. Prompts - for LUKS passphrases are hidden, and once t

[Bug 1945874] [NEW] 21.10 beta, errors in 10-linux and 10_linux_zfs

2021-10-02 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
Public bug reported: In a custom install of Ubuntu 21.10 beta, both hardware and VM installs suffer from a bug in the grub.d/10_linux and 10_linux_zfs scripts. (For comparison, Debian Bullseye, running a similar version of grub, doesn't have this issue.) Unique to Ubuntu, there's this block in 1

[Bug 1945873] [NEW] vt.handoff=7 ~broken on VM

2021-10-02 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
Public bug reported: In an install made with 21.10 beta, the default settings add vt.handoff=7 to the primary kernel command line in /boot/grub/grub.cfg. The effect of this is that the virtual console is somewhat broken during boot. Prompts for LUKS passphrases are hidden, and once the system i

[Bug 1853164] Re: systemd: /etc/dhcp/dhclient-enter-hooks.d/resolved error

2021-07-09 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
I've tested this, and under the noted conditions resolvconf no longer has an issue updating /etc/resolv.conf. Thank you for your time and attention to detail! Unless someone else weighs in noting a problem, from my perspective it seems like this bug can be closed now, as you've corrected the issue

[Bug 1853164] Re: systemd: /etc/dhcp/dhclient-enter-hooks.d/resolved error

2021-07-09 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
Hey there. Thanks for your time on this. I'll try to supply positive confirmation over the weekend. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1853164 Title: systemd: /etc/dhcp/dhclient-enter-hoo

[Bug 1886851] [NEW] irssi freezes on particular input - upstream bugs

2020-07-08 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
Public bug reported: I've observed that irssi in Focal Fossa locks up randomly, requiring that the process be killed. It seems very likely that it is (or is related to) the following upstream bug report: https://github.com/irssi/irssi/issues/1180 https://github.com/irssi/irssi/pull/1183

[Bug 1868553] Re: libefi* integration breaks grub-install on MD devices

2020-06-24 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
FWIW, my prior comment was confusing. GRUB handles both efibootmgr entries correctly on its own with this new functionality. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1868553 Title: libefi* inte

[Bug 1868553] Re: libefi* integration breaks grub-install on MD devices

2020-06-05 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
Paride, It was a limited-duration copy of the original text pasted into my previous ticket comment, so it contained unblemished formatting but was otherwise identical content. As an addendum, I tested 20.04 with a two-ESP system and I was able to specify both ESPs when I ran: dpkg-reconfig

[Bug 1868553] Re: libefi* integration breaks grub-install on MD devices

2020-06-02 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
So, "dpkg-reconfigure grub-efi-amd64" now has a screen that matches what we'd get reconfiguring the old grub-pc: ┌──┤ Configuring grub-efi-amd64 ├───┐ │ The grub-efi package is being upgraded.

[Bug 1868553] Re: libefi* integration breaks grub-install on MD devices

2020-06-02 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
https://bpa.st/FQOQ -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1868553 Title: libefi* integration breaks grub-install on MD devices To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.lau

[Bug 1861359] Re: swap storms kills interactive use

2020-04-03 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
Reporter hasn't confirmed that it's corrected yet... "Fix committed" seems premature. ** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu Focal) Status: Fix Committed => Confirmed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad

[Bug 1869716] Re: Removing libpango1.0-0 broke Minecraft Launcher

2020-03-30 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
Note: In Bionic - I haven't checked exhaustively - libpango1.0-0 is a transitional package, and libpango-1.0-0 is the actual package. Perhaps Focal Fossa should continue to ship the transitional package to keep Minecraft folk from encountering this. Not sure what policy applies. -- You receive

[Bug 1869716] Re: Removing libpango1.0-0 broke Minecraft Launcher

2020-03-30 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
And RikMills notes: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pango1.0/1.44.7-2ubuntu1 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1869716 Title: Removing libpango1.0-0 broke Minecraft Launcher To

[Bug 1869614] [NEW] Missing bits noted on 16.04 to 18.04 do-release-upgrade

2020-03-29 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
Public bug reported: I've noted two things on a recent do-release-upgrade wherein I upgraded a system from 16.04 to 18.04. It largely went well, but after the upgrade I didn't see Canonical Livepatch status in my motd. When I looked, I noted update-motd:amd64 missing, so I installed that, but

[Bug 1853164] Re: systemd: /etc/dhcp/dhclient-enter-hooks.d/resolved error

2019-11-21 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
Interesting. But the code is still incorrect, with my patch correcting it, so I guess we'll see how it goes. I can either fix it locally or go elsewhere, but I'm hoping it's simply fixed in the distribution. Thanks for the pointer. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member

[Bug 1853164] Re: systemd: /etc/dhcp/dhclient-enter-hooks.d/resolved error

2019-11-19 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
sdezial notes this being terser. I do the long form out of superstitious awe at the notion of a return code of zero being "true", even though it always is, but this would be terser and also correct: if systemctl is-active systemd-resolved > /dev/null 2>&1; then -- You received this bug notif

[Bug 1853164] [NEW] systemd: /etc/dhcp/dhclient-enter-hooks.d/resolved error

2019-11-19 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
Public bug reported: The functionality exists to allow users to revert to the traditional ifupdown package for network configuration. Alongside this, systemd's often-buggy resolver can be disabled. However, there's a logic error in the systemd- supplied /etc/dhcp/dhclient-enter-hooks.d/resolved

[Bug 1853164] Re: systemd: /etc/dhcp/dhclient-enter-hooks.d/resolved error

2019-11-19 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
-- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1853164 Title: systemd: /etc/dhcp/dhclient-enter-hooks.d/resolved error To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/

[Bug 1830096] Re: Firefox 67 in Ubuntu 18.10 thinks it's an older version

2019-05-31 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
For what it's worth, my kids encountered this on two desktops today, moving from 16.04 to 18.04. As this would be a major issue for non- technical folk I'd urge getting the fix out the door sooner rather than later - especially on 18.04, to preserve LTS as being a safe choice. The workaround I use

[Bug 1779736] Re: umask ignored on NFSv4.2 mounts

2019-03-07 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
I can confirm that "zfs set acltype=posixacl foo/bar/" is an effective workaround. It appears to be unset by default. root@box /root# zfs set acltype=posixacl pool/srv/thing root@box /root# zfs get acltype pool/srv NAME PROPERTY VALUE SOURCE pool/srv acltype off default root@bo

[Bug 1789130] Re: netplan apply doesn't activate NetworkManager

2018-08-27 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
I just tried again on a fresh install, and noted this in syslog: Aug 27 21:55:14 penguin systemd-timesyncd[904]: Network configuration changed, trying to establish connection. Aug 27 21:55:14 penguin systemd[1]: Starting Load/Save RF Kill Switch Status... Aug 27 21:55:14 penguin systemd-rfkill[97

[Bug 1789119] Re: conversion from netplan to ifupdown broken

2018-08-27 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
I'm going to go ahead and close this. I can't reproduce it, on VMs or on the hardware where I encountered it. I must have fat-fingered something. Sorry for the noise. ** Changed in: netplan.io (Ubuntu) Status: Incomplete => Invalid -- You received this bug notification because you are a

[Bug 1789130] [NEW] netplan apply doesn't activate NetworkManager

2018-08-26 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
Public bug reported: Starting with the Ubuntu Server install, I get netplan driving systemd- networkd by default. If I change /etc/netplan/01-netcfg.yaml to point to NetworkManager, "netplan apply" doesn't fire up NetworkManager. Attached screenshot illustrates what I see. ** Affects: netplan.i

[Bug 1789119] [NEW] conversion from netplan to ifupdown broken

2018-08-26 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
Public bug reported: A new install of Ubuntu 18.04 server suggests that ifupdown can be accessed by installing and configuring it. I was able to install and configure ifupdown, but booting hung on an unlimited wait for network, and this didn't stop until I removed the netplan.io package while boo

[Bug 1789119] Re: conversion from netplan to ifupdown broken

2018-08-26 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
If it matters, the /etc/network/interfaces file I created was similar to this: auto br0 iface br0 inet static address /24 gateway bridge_ports enp2s0 dns_nameserver dns_search I didn't think to configure lo, and conceivably that could have mattered. -- You received this b

[Bug 1782224] [NEW] Xenial fails to boot on a degraded array

2018-07-17 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
Public bug reported: This is similar to what was reported as fixed in bug 1635049 and described here: https://askubuntu.com/questions/789953/how-to-enable-degraded-raid1 -boot-in-16-04lts/798213 Automatic booting with a degraded array fails. One must wait for the initramfs prompt and manuall

[Bug 1578830] Re: gnome-terminal fails to launch after install of xenial

2018-03-19 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
Note: 1474927, 1578830, and 1652451 all seem to refer to the same issue. The error code noted is documented here: https://wiki.gnome.org/Apps/Terminal/FAQ#Exit_status_8 This followed by a reboot or logging back in ought to resolve the issue: sudo localectl set-locale LANG=en_US.utf8 If

[Bug 1474927] Re: gnome-terminal crashes with "Error constructing proxy for org.gnome.Terminal:/org/gnome/Terminal/Factory0: Error calling StartServiceByName for org.gnome.Terminal: GDBus.Error:org.fr

2018-03-19 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
Note: 1474927, 1578830, and 1652451 all seem to refer to the same issue. The error code noted is documented here: https://wiki.gnome.org/Apps/Terminal/FAQ#Exit_status_8 This followed by a reboot or logging back in ought to resolve the issue: sudo localectl set-locale LANG=en_US.utf8 If

[Bug 1652451] Re: Gnome Terminal doesn't launch

2018-03-19 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
Note: 1474927, 1578830, and 1652451 all seem to refer to the same issue. The error code noted is documented here: https://wiki.gnome.org/Apps/Terminal/FAQ#Exit_status_8 This followed by a reboot or logging back in ought to resolve the issue: sudo localectl set-locale LANG=en_US.utf8 If

[Bug 1554795] Re: timeout on restart or shutdown with LUKS root

2016-11-23 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
I'm curious about these two status changes: Changed in systemd (Ubuntu): status: Confirmed → Fix Released Changed in initramfs-tools (Ubuntu): status: Confirmed → Fix Committed Would it be possible to have pointers to the commit(s) that fixed this? Thanks! -- You received this

[Bug 1554795] Re: timeout on restart or shutdown with LUKS root

2016-03-22 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
I'm going to open a seperate ticket for the typo/cosmetic issues noted, so that this ticket can focus on the core. I'll note the ticket number here once I've created it, which I'll do on the other side of my commute. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, w

[Bug 1554795] Re: timeout on restart or shutdown with LUKS root

2016-03-22 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
In addition to the typo, there may be an issue where the new setting I poked in is used, but the hardcoded default is still displayed on- screen. I've not been able to capture this on camera as yet, and I have yet to set things up such that all the generated messages are stored for later perusal, i

[Bug 1554795] Re: timeout on restart or shutdown with LUKS root

2016-03-21 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
I just confirmed that I see this on a laptop as well. Conveniently, the laptop install is not using MD-RAID or ZFS - it's using LVM on LUKS on a single disk, so it's a simpler case. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https

[Bug 1554795] Re: timeout on restart or shutdown with LUKS root

2016-03-20 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
Assuming this isn't fixed any time soon, I'm running with this: mason@ogre /home/mason$ cat /etc/systemd/system.conf.d/expletive.conf # required singleton - high ceremony [Manager] #DefaultTimeoutStartSec=15s DefaultTimeoutStopSec=15s Note that while "Manager" is evidently the only possible sect

[Bug 1554795] Re: timeout on restart or shutdown with LUKS root

2016-03-20 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
I just managed to time it right such that I caught the error on my screen, and in doing to noticed a glaring typo that's likely indicative of the overall code quality of the related software. I'd be grateful for debugging tips. I hope Canonical's not going to ship software that punishes LUKS users

[Bug 1554803] Re: apparmor: missing stub hardware directories

2016-03-09 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
That seems like a reasonable approach. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1554803 Title: apparmor: missing stub hardware directories To manage notifications about this bug go to: https:/

[Bug 1554803] [NEW] apparmor throwing inexplicable errors

2016-03-08 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
Public bug reported: ● apparmor.service - LSB: AppArmor initialization Loaded: loaded (/etc/init.d/apparmor; bad; vendor preset: enabled) Active: failed (Result: exit-code) since Tue 2016-03-08 14:34:04 EST; 4h 23min ago Docs: man:systemd-sysv-generator(8) Process: 2909 ExecStart=/et

[Bug 1554795] Re: timeout on restart or shutdown with LUKS root

2016-03-08 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
** Also affects: initramfs-tools (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/1554795 Title: timeout on restart or shutdown with LUKS root To m

[Bug 1554795] [NEW] timeout on restart or shutdown with LUKS root

2016-03-08 Thread Mason Loring Bliss
Public bug reported: Using the server install ISO, it's possible to specify root on LUKS and variations thereof - for instance, root on LUKS on MD-RAID, root on LVM on LUKS on MD-RAID, and so forth. The installer does the right thing and initramfs-tools does everything necessary to support booting