The officially official Devuan Forum!

You are not logged in.

#176 Re: Other Issues » [SOLVED] Beowulf kernel upgrade oddity » 2022-03-08 19:03:24

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

@OP: can we see the full output of

# apt update

From yesterday (I still had the terminal window open):

# apt update
Hit:1 http://iweb.dl.sourceforge.net/project/ubuntuzilla/mozilla/apt all InRelease
Hit:2 http://deb.devuan.org/merged beowulf InRelease
Hit:3 http://deb.devuan.org/merged beowulf-updates InRelease
Get:4 http://deb.devuan.org/merged beowulf-security InRelease [26.5 kB]
Hit:5 http://deb.devuan.org/merged beowulf-backports InRelease
Fetched 26.5 kB in 4s (7,067 B/s)
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree       
Reading state information... Done
All packages are up to date.

From just a few minutes ago:

# apt update
Hit:1 http://versaweb.dl.sourceforge.net/project/ubuntuzilla/mozilla/apt all InRelease
Get:2 http://deb.devuan.org/merged beowulf InRelease [33.8 kB]
Get:3 http://deb.devuan.org/merged beowulf-updates InRelease [26.7 kB]
Get:4 http://deb.devuan.org/merged beowulf-security InRelease [26.5 kB]
Get:5 http://deb.devuan.org/merged beowulf-backports InRelease [26.9 kB]
Get:6 http://deb.devuan.org/merged beowulf-backports/main amd64 Packages [491 kB]
Fetched 605 kB in 4s (151 kB/s)   
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree       
Reading state information... Done
2 packages can be upgraded. Run 'apt list --upgradable' to see them.
# apt list --upgradable
Listing... Done
linux-headers-amd64/oldstable-backports 5.10.92-1~bpo10+1 amd64 [upgradable from: 5.10.70-1~bpo10+1]
linux-image-amd64/oldstable-backports 5.10.92-1~bpo10+1 amd64 [upgradable from: 5.10.70-1~bpo10+1]

So, the upgrade was NOT available yesterday, but now it is.

#177 Other Issues » [SOLVED] Beowulf kernel upgrade oddity » 2022-03-08 01:49:44

pcalvert
Replies: 4

I am using a kernel from backports on Beowulf and just noticed something strange.

$ apt policy linux-image-amd64
linux-image-amd64:
  Installed: 5.10.70-1~bpo10+1
  Candidate: 5.10.70-1~bpo10+1
  Version table:
 *** 5.10.70-1~bpo10+1 100
        100 http://deb.devuan.org/merged beowulf-backports/main amd64 Packages
        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
     4.19+105+deb10u13 500
        500 http://deb.devuan.org/merged beowulf/main amd64 Packages
     4.19+105+deb10u9 500
        500 http://deb.devuan.org/merged beowulf-security/main amd64 Packages

Searching my apt package cache shows that the latest kernel I have is dated 30-October-2021:

$ ls -l /var/cache/apt/archives |grep linux-image-
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 48399932 Jul 19  2021 linux-image-4.19.0-17-amd64_4.19.194-3_amd64.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 53423672 Aug 19  2021 linux-image-5.10.0-0.bpo.8-amd64_5.10.46-4~bpo10+1_amd64.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 53505900 Oct 30 16:58 linux-image-5.10.0-0.bpo.9-amd64_5.10.70-1~bpo10+1_amd64.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root     1504 Aug 19  2021 linux-image-amd64_5.10.46-4~bpo10+1_amd64.deb

A little research shows that the version I have is the latest version available for download:

Package: linux-image-5.10.0-0.bpo.9-amd64 (5.10.70-1~bpo10+1)
https://packages.debian.org/buster-back … po.9-amd64

However, if you click on the Debian Changelog link on the right-hand side of that page, you'll see this at the top of the page:

linux-signed-amd64 (5.10.92+1~bpo10+1) buster-backports; urgency=medium

  * Sign kernel from linux 5.10.92-1~bpo10+1

  * Rebuild for buster-backports:
    - Change ABI number to 0.bpo.11

 -- Ben Hutchings <benh@debian.org>  Thu, 03 Feb 2022 19:49:50 +0100

February 3, 2022 was over a month ago. What's going on?

#178 Re: Hardware & System Configuration » Severe damage to ext4 filesystem - advice needed » 2022-02-13 15:00:10

This is the approach that I use:

df -h

That shows me my mounted drives. If I see (for example) that /dev/sdb is my "highest" drive, then I'll guess that the USB stick will be /dev/sdc.

Although my guess has usually been correct, I always verify it like this:

# fdisk -l /dev/sdc

I then look at the output of fdisk to see if the size of /dev/sdc (and other drive info) matches what I expect. It usually does, but if were to ever see something I wasn't expecting, then I would know to be extra careful before proceeding.

#179 Re: Installation » How to have updated firefox-esr in Chimaera? » 2022-01-06 17:19:23

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

Yeah, it really is impossible to tell what Chrome is doing. It even adds Google's repositories in an install script, which freaks me out.

Speaking of Google Chrome, I just saw this article today:

Google makes the perfect case for why you shouldn't use Chrome

#180 Re: Installation » How to have updated firefox-esr in Chimaera? » 2021-12-29 15:13:53

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

But hey, the big G offers a Chrome .deb that should be compatible with Devuan. The telemetry for that makes FF looks like a paragon of privacy but you know that, right?

If I used it at all, I would only use Google Chrome in a VM. I installed it once on my main system, and noticed some odd behavior after doing so. It might have been a coincidence, but the strange behavior went away after I became suspicious and uninstalled Google Chrome, so I am inclined to believe that Google Chrome was somehow responsible.

#181 Re: Installation » how to clone a partition with os installed? » 2021-12-24 15:12:06

I would boot from a live CD/DVD/USB system and use partclone to clone the partitions. I would use Refracta or the Devuan live DVD and install partclone using apt. Alternatively, you could use the GParted live CD, which comes with partclone. However, the GParted live CD seems a little rough around the edges, and is based on Debian Sid, so I'd recommend that you not use it.

Download links for Devuan:
https://www.devuan.org/get-devuan

Download links for Refracta:
https://get.refracta.org/

Info about the GParted live CD:
https://gparted.org/livecd.php

Download links for the GParted live CD:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/gparte … ve-stable/

#182 Re: Devuan Derivatives » Refracta 11 (Chimaera) isos » 2021-12-11 14:15:13

That worked. Thanks for the prompt reply!

#183 Re: Devuan Derivatives » Refracta 11 (Chimaera) isos » 2021-12-11 12:52:01

Unless I did something wrong, it looks like your key has expired.

$ gpg --verify SHA256SUMS.txt.asc SHA256SUMS.txt
gpg: Signature made Tue 16 Nov 2021 09:35:28 AM EST
gpg:                using RSA key 67F5013216271E85C251E480A73823D3094C5620
gpg: Good signature from "fsmithred (aka fsr) <fsmithred@g***l.com>" [expired]
gpg: Note: This key has expired!
Primary key fingerprint: 67F5 0132 1627 1E85 C251  E480 A738 23D3 094C 5620

#184 Re: Hardware & System Configuration » Attention Dual/Multi-booters: Latest GRUB (2.06-2) disables os-prober » 2021-12-01 23:28:52

blackhole wrote:

https://www.gnu.org/software/grub/manua … figuration

It is disabled by default since automatic and silent execution of os-prober, and creating boot entries based on that data, is a potential attack vector.

It seems to me that there's a simple solution that will solve this problem -- ask the user to confirm that the information obtained from os-prober is correct. Or write the info to the appropriate config file, but commented out, along with a comment above it explaining why it's commented out and the importance of verifying that the information is correct before uncommenting it.

#185 Re: Hardware & System Configuration » Attention Dual/Multi-booters: Latest GRUB (2.06-2) disables os-prober » 2021-12-01 23:01:55

MiyoLinux wrote:

The only systems that are using version 2.06 are Devuan Ceres and Debian Sid. Everything else is using a lower version number (for now). So, it shouldn't affect you as far as I can tell.

Thank-you. I need to upgrade that system soon, and having the multi-boot menu break is a problem that I don't need.

#186 Re: Hardware & System Configuration » Attention Dual/Multi-booters: Latest GRUB (2.06-2) disables os-prober » 2021-12-01 03:21:06

rolfie wrote:

My experience is that os-prober never worked on efi systems. Valid for Stretch/ASCII, Buster/Beowulf, Bullseye/Chimaera.

What about a Jessie system that was upgraded to Stretch? Would the upgrade remove the working multi-boot menu?

#187 Re: Hardware & System Configuration » VBox virtual machine error in dmesg » 2021-11-22 20:01:28

Altoid wrote:

Have you tried the latest one from the virtual box repository or was that the one that locked up?

No, not yet. I am reluctant to do so since I don't have much hope that it will work, and since what I have now is working, I really don't want to mess with it. I probably won't try it until after I upgrade to Chimaera.

#188 Re: Hardware & System Configuration » VBox virtual machine error in dmesg » 2021-11-22 01:43:22

My experience has been that VirtualBox 6.1 is messed up and doesn't work right on Beowulf. I had VMs completely lock up, multiple times. The latest version that has been working reliably for me is 6.1.22 r144080 (Qt5.6.1). And in case it matters, I am also using a kernel (and headers) from backports (on the host system). Hopefully this problem will disappear when I upgrade to Chimaera.

Just thought I'd pass along this information in case it's helpful.

#189 Re: Other Issues » [SOLVED] ungoogled-chromium, Iridium, or LibreWolf, please » 2021-11-05 00:16:53

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

Debian does not supply Chrome, and they never will. But I do agree that the chomium package in the repositories is in a pretty poor state. Google don't provide an LTS version (unlike Mozilla) and Debian just can't keep up with the steady stream of vulnerabilities:

https://security-tracker.debian.org/tra … e/chromium

So the chromium package is outdated and riddled with potential security holes. Not good.

When I want a Chromium-based web browser, I install Vivaldi:

https://vivaldi.com/

The first time I installed it, the UI was kind of weird, and it wasn't long before I uninstalled it. However, I gave Vivaldi a second chance later on, and they had clearly improved it a lot.

#190 Re: Other Issues » [SOLVED] ungoogled-chromium, Iridium, or LibreWolf, please » 2021-11-02 22:07:49

I believe that MX Linux has Iridium (package name: iridium-browser). I no longer have any packages from MX Linux installed, but I did in the past. The tricky part was setting up the apt-pinning so that only the packages I wanted from MX Linux were installed, and nothing else.

#191 Re: Installation » Status of lilo » 2021-10-24 19:56:31

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

If a package is marked obsolete then it has already been removed from the repositories[1].

That's a pity, because I have run into cases where GRUB did not work, or refused to install, but LILO installed and worked just fine. I'd rather use GRUB, but it's nice to have an alternative to fall back on when needed.

Note: It appears that LILO is still in Sid.

https://packages.debian.org/sid/lilo

#192 Re: Installation » When did Legacy BIOS cease to exist? » 2021-09-30 10:24:57

PedroReina wrote:

Agreed. But, how could us know if a motherboard is compatible or not? I dig in the technical specifications of some of them I cannot find if I can disable Secure Boot.

Here's a start:

https://coreboot.org/status/board-status.html
https://www.mail-archive.com/coreboot@c … 38710.html

I wish I had some better suggestions for you, but I am just beginning to research this topic.

#193 Re: Installation » When did Legacy BIOS cease to exist? » 2021-09-29 06:37:03

In the future, I am going to use Libreboot or coreboot as much as possible. If a computer or motherboard isn't compatible with either of those, I simply won't buy it.

#194 Re: Desktop and Multimedia » Wicd in Chimaera (It's not, but...) » 2021-08-30 10:01:50

NetworkManager works fine, and I prefer it over wicd because it has plugins that make setting up and using a VPN fairly easy.

Based on the packages I have installed, I believe that this is the way I installed it:

aptitude install network-manager-gnome network-manager-openvpn-gnome

I only mention this because, based on a tutorial I saw that mentions replacing NetworkManager with wicd, it appears that some people believe that NetworkManager doesn't work in Devuan. That is not the case. Although I'm not certain about Chimaera, because I haven't used it, NetworkManager definitely works fine in Refracta/Beowulf.

Phil

#195 Re: Installation » Minimal KDE install in Beowulf » 2021-07-02 00:46:16

I would use a slightly different approach:

# aptitude install -R kde-plasma-desktop plasma-nm kwin-x11 sddm xserver-xorg 2>&1 | tee KDE-desktop-installation-log.txt

This installs KDE without recommended packages. That's why I save a log of the installation. After the installation, I would open the log file and look to see which recommended packages weren't installed because I may want to install some of them.

Disclaimer: I haven't actually tried this because I don't use KDE anymore. However, this is the general approach I would use to install any desktop environment, and I have used it to install Xfce.

#196 Re: Installation » low memory installation » 2021-05-20 01:33:29

I would use a window manager like fluxbox, IceWM, or JWM. Up until 2013, I used Debian with IceWM on a 300 MHz Pentium II laptop with 256 MB of RAM. It was slow (the web browser, mainly), but usable.

For the web browser I would use SeaMonkey along with NoScript "Classic" (version 5.1.x). I would also disable the ChatZilla and Lightning extensions if you aren't going to use them. Using NoScript may seem annoying and inconvenient at first, but it really helps speed up web browsing by preventing a lot of unnecessary JavaScript from running. Some websites are loaded up with so much third-party JavaScript it's ridiculous.

The best way to install SeaMonkey is to use the Ubuntuzilla repository. Despite the name, the packages are compatible with Debian and Debian derivatives.

#197 Re: Other Issues » [SOLVED] Security update delays (again) » 2021-05-16 00:11:30

I received this notification more than 48 hours ago:

- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Debian Security Advisory DSA-4915-1                   security@debian.org
https://www.debian.org/security/                       Moritz Muehlenhoff
May 13, 2021                          https://www.debian.org/security/faq
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------

Package        : postgresql-11
CVE ID         : CVE-2021-32027 CVE-2021-32028 CVE-2021-32029

Multiple security issues have been discovered in the PostgreSQL database
system, which could result in the execution of arbitrary code or
disclosure of memory content.

For the stable distribution (buster), these problems have been fixed in
version 11.12-0+deb10u1.

We recommend that you upgrade your postgresql-11 packages.

For the detailed security status of postgresql-11 please refer to
its security tracker page at:
https://security-tracker.debian.org/tra … tgresql-11

Further information about Debian Security Advisories, how to apply
these updates to your system and frequently asked questions can be
found at: https://www.debian.org/security/

Mailing list: debian-security-announce@lists.debian.org

This does not look right:

$ apt policy postgresql-11
postgresql-11:
  Installed: (none)
  Candidate: 11.11-0+deb10u1
  Version table:
     11.11-0+deb10u1 500
        500 http://deb.devuan.org/merged beowulf/main amd64 Packages
     11.7-0+deb10u1 500
        500 http://deb.devuan.org/merged beowulf-security/main amd64 Packages

#198 Re: Other Issues » [SOLVED] Security update delays (again) » 2021-05-10 17:09:22

It finally came through some time earlier today.

$ apt policy exim4
exim4:
  Installed: 4.92-8+deb10u5
  Candidate: 4.92-8+deb10u6
  Version table:
     4.92-8+deb10u6 500
        500 http://deb.devuan.org/merged beowulf-security/main amd64 Packages
 *** 4.92-8+deb10u5 500
        500 http://deb.devuan.org/merged beowulf/main amd64 Packages
        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status

#199 Re: Other Issues » [SOLVED] Security update delays (again) » 2021-05-09 19:06:52

In case it helps, this is the last security update that came through in a timely manner:

- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Debian Security Advisory DSA-4911-1                   security@debian.org
https://www.debian.org/security/                          Michael Gilbert
May 03, 2021                          https://www.debian.org/security/faq
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------

Package        : chromium
CVE ID         : CVE-2021-21227 CVE-2021-21228 CVE-2021-21229 CVE-2021-21230
                 CVE-2021-21231 CVE-2021-21232 CVE-2021-21233

Several vulnerabilities have been discovered in the chromium web browser.

CVE-2021-21227

    Gengming Liu discovered a data validation issue in the v8 javascript
    library.

CVE-2021-21228

    Rob Wu discovered a policy enforcement error.

CVE-2021-21229

    Mohit Raj discovered a user interface error in the file downloader.

CVE-2021-21230

    Manfred Paul discovered use of an incorrect type.

CVE-2021-21231

    Sergei Glazunov discovered a data validation issue in the v8 javascript
    library.

CVE-2021-21232

    Abdulrahman Alqabandi discovered a use-after-free issue in the developer
    tools.

CVE-2021-21233

    Omair discovered a buffer overflow issue in the ANGLE library.

For the stable distribution (buster), these problems have been fixed in
version 90.0.4430.93-1~deb10u1.

We recommend that you upgrade your chromium packages.

For the detailed security status of chromium please refer to
its security tracker page at:
https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/chromium

Further information about Debian Security Advisories, how to apply
these updates to your system and frequently asked questions can be
found at: https://www.debian.org/security/

Mailing list: debian-security-announce@lists.debian.org

From aptitude's log file:

Aptitude 0.8.11: log report
Tue, May  4 2021 10:27:13 -0400

  IMPORTANT: this log only lists intended actions; actions which fail
  due to dpkg problems may not be completed.

Will install 3 packages, and remove 0 packages.
4096 B of disk space will be used
========================================
[UPGRADE] chromium:amd64 90.0.4430.85-1~deb10u1 -> 90.0.4430.93-1~deb10u1
[UPGRADE] chromium-common:amd64 90.0.4430.85-1~deb10u1 -> 90.0.4430.93-1~deb10u1
[UPGRADE] chromium-sandbox:amd64 90.0.4430.85-1~deb10u1 -> 90.0.4430.93-1~deb10u1
========================================

Log complete.

#200 Re: Other Issues » [SOLVED] Security update delays (again) » 2021-05-08 14:04:45

It has now been over 96 hours, and there is still no sign of the update.

$ apt policy exim4
exim4:
  Installed: 4.92-8+deb10u5
  Candidate: 4.92-8+deb10u5
  Version table:
 *** 4.92-8+deb10u5 500
        500 http://deb.devuan.org/merged beowulf/main amd64 Packages
        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
     4.92-8+deb10u4 500
        500 http://deb.devuan.org/merged beowulf-security/main amd64 Packages

By the way, in case it matters, I am using Refracta based on Devuan Beowulf. I forgot to mention that in my original post.

Board footer

Forum Software