[00:00] I'm able to download the index page [00:01] then it works [00:01] Ben64: but it doesn't... :/ [00:01] you were able to get the site via wget [00:01] restart your browser perhaps/ [00:02] check your /etc/hosts on the machine with the brwoser to make sure that you didn't fake it up for a bit? :) [00:02] sarnold: I'm using a proxy to check it from outside [00:02] sarnold: feels like you're speaking from experience :) [00:02] it doesn't load [00:03] I did the wget from within the same server... I think that means I cheated a bit [00:03] nacc: *ahem* me no I never make mistakes no never! :) [00:03] yeah, you need to wget from outsite .... [00:04] what's the website [00:04] sarnold: that's my operating assumption now :) [00:04] uhoh :) [00:05] I can't really do wget from here [00:05] I'll get intercepted by the router when I come back [00:05] ok so what's the site [00:05] https://guillermourcera.com [00:06] yep, doesn't work [00:07] Any ideas? It worked wine until a couple of days ago, and I can load other sites on the same server just fine [00:07] 80/tcp filtered http [00:07] it's really weird [00:07] you need to open the port [00:08] and probably stop trying to run a site from a home connection [00:09] Ben64: open port 80? isn't it open on "Nginx Full" ? Also, if I'm only using https don't I just need 443? [00:10] 443/tcp filtered https [00:10] you should have both open [00:10] and really, stop running servers at home [00:22] All 1000 scanned ports on guillermourcera.com (2.136.41.191) are filtered [00:22] hehe yeah looks like a firewall somewhere is unhappy [00:37] hello, I am looking for a way to install Latex with a working package manager (system wide), is this possible? [00:37] Hey all, anyone know why in ubuntu 16.04 I'm seeing a bunch of "permission denied" when I do 'sudo find / -name blah' [00:38] I'm getting it when I run command as root too [00:39] Pinkamena_D: apt-get install texlive-latex-base should get you a working pdflatex command. Of course you may need more packages depending upon what your documents require. [00:39] jge: for which files/directories? [00:41] sarnold: Thank you, my issue is that I am trying to install the 'tracklang' package for all users. Using the 'tlmgr' program I can only install it for one user. [00:41] sarnold: lstat() failed for /var/lib/lxcfs/cgroup/blkio/blkio.reset_stats:Permission denied lstat() failed for /var/lib/lxcfs/cgroup/blkio/init.scope/blkio.reset_stats:Permission denied [00:42] sarnold: Also using the 'how to manually install a package' instructions I encountered other missing packages which are dependencies, so I assume going down that route will be a nightmare [00:42] Pinkamena_D: the texlive-generic-extra package claims to have tracklang [00:42] that's an output from aide by the way which is giving a lot of permission denied errors as well [00:42] I have the same exact set up using 14.04 and not seeing it [00:42] I did $ apt-file search "tracklang.sty" and got no results, was this incorrect? [00:43] ; how did you find that package? [00:44] Pinkamena_D: hmm is your apt-file up-to-date? mine wasn't, but after updating it, I find: $ apt-file show texlive-generic-extra | grep tracklang.sty [00:44] texlive-generic-extra: /usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/tracklang/tracklang.sty [00:44] Pinkamena_D: I ran 'apt-cache search tracklang' to find the package name [00:45] jge: curious. I wonder how that happens. :) what filesystem type is mounted there? [00:46] ahh, apt-cache - I will keep that in mind, thanks! ; So I guess the idea in general is to just pray that the packages are in one of the ubuntu .debs , then? [00:47] that's been my approach to latex packages for sure :) [00:47] I never got the hang of their 'native' packaging thingy.. [00:49] sarnold: ok, I appreciate it. Have a good night! [00:49] you too, have fun :) [00:50] sarnold: it's ext4 [00:50] weird issue, fresh install too [00:52] jge: _really_? I was expecting either cgroups or lxcfs. I wasn't sure which one to expect. [00:55] hmm yeah I dont know whats going on [01:04] sarnold: not to be annoying but do you happen to have a fresh install of ubuntu server 16 around you can test something for me? [01:05] jge: let me spin on up [01:05] awesome, thank you [01:11] jge: alright, it's up [01:11] sarnold: could you as root run, 'find / -name blah' [01:12] do you get any permission denied messages? [01:13] jge: all the same stuff in /var/lib/lxcfs/cgroup/ [01:14] sarnold: ok, so it's not something I did.. [01:15] lxcfs on /var/lib/lxcfs type fuse.lxcfs .... [01:15] jge: yeah. lxcfs over fuse makes sense to me, that's the most luikely thing to return permissionm denied to root, woot [01:17] sarnold: not sure I understood that last line, so is this normal? [01:18] my aide reports are also getting a bunch of permission denied on /var/lib/lxcfs and /run/lxcfs [01:18] jge: yeah, it probably only makes sense 'within' a container of some sort [01:18] feel free to tell aide to skip all those [01:19] yeah I'll tell it to ignore [01:19] thanks for looking into that sarnold [01:20] my pleasure, I was curious too :) [01:20] ;) [02:32] I missed the message but the 16.04 lts server install doesn't boot on an ibm x3850 m2 [02:32] I think the 16.10 does, but I'm checking now [03:04] might be needing iommu=soft [03:04] Looking at this page: http://releases.ubuntu.com/xenial/ , it seems like there's a bunch of text copied and pasted at the top... Am I misunderstanding something? There used to be an "alternate install", is that just gone for Xenial? [03:06] eww :) [03:07] nedbat, for a long time now, mini iso and netinstall are your choise [03:07] OerHeks: any idea why that page has the same paragraphs three times? [03:08] I see the same [03:08] two desktops and 3 servers === Phanes- is now known as Phanes [03:09] nedbat, page is borked indeed, multiple links to .iso and .img [03:10] some of it is because there's 16.04 and 16.04.1 links in the different paragraphs [03:11] oh, that clears it up [03:11] well, it explains four of the five paragraphs :) the doubled server 16.04 links still dont make sense [03:12] and it's probably not right no matter what, I think just 16.04.1 links alone would be best [03:15] ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ [03:51] thanks nedbat, I filed https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-cdimage/+bug/1646335 [03:51] Launchpad bug 1646335 in Ubuntu CD Images "duplicated text on http://releases.ubuntu.com/xenial/" [Undecided,New] [04:18] coreycb, yes. and I re-uploaded debdiff for Kilo. [04:25] I have used ubuntu on my HTPC for a few years, all is usually well but with a few videos there is some low framerate issues. I just switched out the TV so I can no longer use the S-video out from the old vidoe card and I need to buy a new card with HDMI. Any recommendations of a good card for linux which would be able to make use of hardware acceleration? [04:27] oops wrong channel [04:36] hiyesterday [04:37] yesterday suddenly the remote host identification was changed [04:38] is this something to do with the "Packages that will be upgraded: python-cryptography vim vim-common vim-runtime vim-tiny" entry I see in the unatended-upgrades log file? [04:47] hello === farhad is now known as Guest10752 [08:06] Good morning === amoralej|off is now known as amoralej === iberezovskiy|off is now known as iberezovskiy === farhad is now known as Guest55051 === x2xx3x_ is now known as x2xx3x === v12aml_ is now known as v12aml === albech1 is now known as albech [11:24] Hello, why in dpkg buildpackage for python project, in building its only include *py files without others ? [11:36] any reason why duplicating a file on an NFS store to the same directory its in triggers a read/write of that data over the network? I thought NFS was smarter than that [11:41] Don't think so. It's your machine copying the bits! [12:58] coreycb: neutron was buidling fine last night....now ostestr is tracebacking out [12:58] zul, yeah it was ok eod yest [12:59] coreycb: yeah ill take a look at it when i get in (offically) [12:59] zul, ok thanks [12:59] coreycb: although i dont see why it should [13:02] danpawlik, you may need a manifest file. although for openstack projects they're starting to drop their manifest because python-pbr is supposed to do the right thing. [13:05] coreycb: thanks [13:07] coreycb: one more question: http://paste.openstack.org/show/591118/ [13:08] And other people who are here: why cloud archive package have debian/nova-common.postinst have the condition with " ! " http://paste.openstack.org/show/591118/ [13:08] [13:09] danpawlik, i think the idea behind that was to leave db migration to the user or config management on non default installs [13:09] danpawlik, by default it uses an sqlite db but you wouldn't use that in production [13:12] coreycb: sure, but in first condition it try to run it on compute node, where is no "connection" and sqlite connection params. Only controller should have it so I guess it's a bug [13:17] danpawlik, yeah that doesn't seem ideal. does it cause any issues though? btw we've talked about dropping the default sqlite db's recently but i think we need to get an exception because services wouldn't start by default. [13:20] coreycb: normally not. I will not find it but one of my compute hosts was failing and I was wondering why. Now I thinking that condition is bad... I don't know if other people have the same error.. Google doesn't show some interesting posts/errors reported on forums. [13:21] danpawlik, you should be able to just delete the sqlite db after install === amoralej is now known as amoralej|lunch [13:22] * coreycb is leaving for an hour [13:31] rbasak: could you usdi import ntp for me? [13:33] rbasak: I get a ERROR:ubuntu/devel is not a defined object in this git repository, but then the latest Debian is also missing - so maybe a refreshed import will fix it all [13:34] nacc: ^^ in case you are on unexpectedly early :-) [13:40] Trying [13:44] rbasak: let me know if a clone works cleanly for you afterwards - it might be that "my" lpmep has an effect since I merged ntp last time [13:46] logwatch behaves the same for me :-/ [13:58] cpaelzer: done, and "usd clone ntp" works for me too. [13:59] rbasak: tks, checking on my side now [13:59] Doing logwatch === Pici` is now known as Pici [14:01] rbasak: seems to work now for ntp === amoralej|lunch is now known as amoralej === jamespag` is now known as jamespage [15:08] I guess this is very basic [15:08] neutron.notifiers.nova MissingAuthPlugin: An auth plugin is required to determine endpoint URL [15:11] hey guys, i got a question. i got a network printer. i want 1 spool for 1 kind of paper and another 1 for the other kind. the printer always has both kinds of paper. [15:11] when i install a printer with cups i need to enter the IP. can i just go and make a "duplicate" entry with the same IP? [15:40] coreycb I'm rebaseing neutron now, but i noticed the version number has the 0ubuntu1.16.10.1 should I carry that forward? [15:43] coreycb also neither neutron nor neutron-lbaas have any changes in the git log or changelog since last month at the latest. [15:43] for stable/newton that is [15:44] ddellav, you can use 2:9.1.1-0ubuntu1 [15:44] now that zesty has moved on to 10.0.0* [15:44] ok [15:44] ddellav, are you able to import the released upstream tarball? [15:45] coreycb yes, without even having to use replace merge mode [15:45] ddellav, ok [15:46] nacc: I'll quickly do logwatch merge (seems very very minor) - let me know if you already started [15:47] rbasak: nacc: fyi I also just completed NTP and sent a MP for your review queue [16:00] Anyone know of an alternative to this? https://linux-dash.github.io/ [16:00] for Windows [16:01] am0nrahx: wrong channel for Windows [16:01] try ##windows [16:01] Figured someone in here would know since that's a linux utility, but ill try ther. [16:01] this isn't a Windows channel though :p [16:04] coreycb: " oslo_db.exception.DBNonExistentTable: (sqlite3.OperationalError) no such table: floatingipdnses [SQL: u'DELETE FROM floatingipdnses']" [16:17] cpaelzer: nice! [16:42] coreycb neutron and neutron-lbaas rebased [16:48] ddellav, ok [16:55] coreycb ironic-inspector rebased on new repo and available [16:58] ddellav, did ironic-inspector build ok? [17:01] coreycb yes, on xenial and yakkety === iberezovskiy is now known as iberezovskiy|off [17:12] ddellav, neutron pushed/uploaded. neutron-lbaas looks to be a no-op. [17:13] Hi, I'm having an issue where I can only reach my apache server from outside of the local network. If I use the domain name from within the network, I get ERR_CONNECTION_REFUSED, but if I use a local IP, I get some text through, but it looks as though css doesn't make it through (no structure or images). Am I correct in assuming that this is a apach2 configuration problem? [17:24] Thougth it was the router, but I've just relpaced the old one, and the problem remains. === amoralej is now known as amoralej|off [18:40] coreycb: doh....maybe....https://github.com/openstack/oslo.db/commit/e03b0dd06940a9262d90ec2699a4452835c05b56 [19:05] coreycb zul are you guys aware of any issues with nova in newton? I can't get it to build binaries even as-is on xenial or yakkety locally. I'm running it in my ppa just to check but something is up. [19:08] ddellav: no im not [19:36] coreycb: yeah oslo.db regression [19:38] was it a good idea to install 15.04 server? or should i rather go for 14 or 16? [19:41] monsune: 15.04 reached end of life back in february and hasn't received any security updates since then. you should not use it any more [19:41] monsune: for a new system you should use either 16.04 (if you want to install it and leave it) or 16.10 (if you're ok with upgrading to a new release every 6 months) [19:41] monsune: support lifetimes are documented here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Releases === lordievader is now known as Guest74207 [19:43] tarpman thank you very much, that was a precise info :) === Guest74207 is now known as lordievader [19:44] just not understanding why 15 reached end of life while 14 is still being updated? [19:44] monsune: LTS versus non-LTS [19:45] so does it mean that 14 will, in fact, have newer packages, than 15? [19:45] monsune: every two years we release a version that we'll support for five years. every six months we release something that we support for nine months. [19:45] i basically didn't want 16 and wanted something most recent below that [19:45] monsune: no [19:46] sarnold oh hm [19:46] monsune: 15.04 and 15.10 are irrelevant to talk about at this point, they are no longer supported releases [19:46] monsune: you absolutely should not install 15.* [19:46] so many versions... this is really confusing :/ [19:47] monsune: what is confusing? [19:47] monsune: first of all, don't say '15' or '14', they are not Ubuntu versions [19:47] nacc ok so looks like my first step it to wipe 15, but not really sure what's next... [19:47] monsune: second of all, 14.04 is an LTS (so supported for 5 years), as is 16.04 (and 18.04 will be) [19:47] monsune: all other releases are supported for only 9 months [19:47] monsune: 14.04 for the most part has the same versions it has when it was released. a stable release receives targeted fixes for important bugs, and security fixes, but that's it for the most part. new software is generally (with only a few exceptions) not added to an existing release [19:48] monsune: if you're not sure, just go with 16.04 LTS [19:48] an example what is confusing to me: 14.04.1, 14.04.2, 14.04.3, 14.04.4, 14.04.5... and all maintained and supported separately. why is that? i'm sure it makes sense but i'm still not getting it. [19:50] monsune: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/LTSEnablementStack [19:50] the .2, .3, .4, .5, are mostly just newer kernels with newer hardware support [19:50] it's 99.99% the same packages [19:50] monsune: at this point, only 14.04.0, 14.04.1 and 14.04.5 are supported [19:50] tarpman my problem with 16 is php7 that i don't want at the moment but at the same time i don't have access to newest packages if i decide for 14 so this is really hard choice for me [19:50] monsune: you don't have the 'latest' packages in 16.04 either (again stop saying '16') [19:50] oh so those are different kernels mostly, ok got it. [19:51] !latest | monsune [19:51] monsune: Packages in Ubuntu may not be the latest. Ubuntu aims for stability, so "latest" may not be a good idea. Post-release updates are only considered if they are fixes for security vulnerabilities, high impact bug fixes, or unintrusive bug fixes with substantial benefit. See also !backports, !sru, and !ppa. [19:51] i should say newer packages in 16.04 compared to 14.04 [19:51] monsune: kernels and X stack, yeah [19:52] i wonder about various libs also, etc. [19:52] monsune: yes, they will be "newer" in 16.04 than 14.04 [19:52] monsune: generally; specific packages will get more specific responses [19:53] wish i came here to ask for advice before i went with 15.04 (or was it 15.10) [19:54] monsune: when did you do that? [19:54] monsune: as in, when did you do that install [19:54] 2 days ago [19:54] monsune: where did you download those from? [19:54] but does it mean that currently supported 14.04 will have newer security updates than 15.04/10? [19:54] monsune: if your applications can't use php7 yet then it's probably best to stick with 14.04 LTS [19:54] monsune: 15.04 and 15.10 are not supported and don't get any updates! [19:54] well many of them can't [19:55] i'm just not ready for php7 [19:55] at the same time i'm sure i could "profit" from 16.04 in many ways but looks like i'm somehow forced to use 14.04 [19:55] monsune: to have 2 days ago installed 15.04 or 15.10 feels like you had to go out of your way (or not updated your installer USB or whatever): http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/releases/ [19:55] so that's why i thought 15.04/10 would be a good choice... [19:56] "newer than 14.04, older than 16.04 but still good enough for me" while it came out to be absolutely wrong :) [19:56] 15.04 hasn't gotten any security updates since february; 15.10 hasn't gotten any security updates since july [19:57] nacc i just downloaded 15.04 (or .10) from some mirror and installed it [19:57] monsune: that's ridiculous [19:57] 14.04 LTS got a security update a few hours ago :) https://www.ubuntu.com/usn/usn-3133-1/ [19:57] why? i think the naming scheme is simply confusing [19:57] versioning* [19:57] monsune: you downloaded a, potentially, random ISO from some mirror, without checking what was supported or not? [19:57] sarnold so in fact that "old" 14.04 LTS got more security than "newer" 15.04 :) [19:58] nacc it's an official mirror listed at your website [19:58] they have 15.04/10 there so why not [19:58] i guess you should just remove 15.04/10 everywhere if it is so bad to use it [19:58] who is this "you"? [19:59] that's my opinion from an ubuntu noob, the way i see it [19:59] i addressed that to someone who previously said "we release" [19:59] They usually do get moved to old-releases, but I believe there are complex reasons why 15.10 in particular hasn't been moved (Ubuntu phones) [19:59] monsune: other projects often designate one or two versions as an "lts" version that they'll support for longer-than-normal, and other versions are "short-term" releases that they support for only a short while [20:00] rbasak oh ok so that's why [20:00] But there always be a period of time after a release is end-of-life but before it has been moved. You shouldn't rely on it. [20:01] yeah but seriously, it seemed so logical to use 15.04/10 if 16.04 was "too good" for me and 14.04 just seemed "too old"... [20:01] 15 > 14 [20:01] while i totally missed the LTS thing which in fact makes 14 > 15. [20:01] monsune: i feel by your logic, then, old versions of software should not be on github either, because they are discoverable. Yes, you have to spend some effort to konw what's supported or not. You could also just look at www.ubuntu.com to get the current supported version(s). [20:02] seriously, no trolling here or anything, that's just how i see it and decided to share with you [20:02] monsune: I think that misses the point (14 > 15) -- it's that 14.04 is supported still and 15.04/15.10 are not. [20:02] as i said previously - i should really ask in here before installing [20:03] or just read the ubuntu website? [20:03] yeah i should study it all, there was lots of time pressure though [20:04] you were under so much time pressure, you couldn't check if you downloaded a supported version? that seems crazy to me. [20:04] i think i'm done talking about this [20:04] so i really wasn't thinking much: "hm 15 > 14, cool with me" [20:04] nacc it wasn't even in "unsupported" section first of all [20:06] monsune: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Releases [20:06] monsune: so ... it was [20:06] monsune: where did you even find a 15.05/15.10 image? https://www.ubuntu.com/download/server only lists 16.04 and 16.10 [20:07] this is where i went to grab it: http://de.releases.ubuntu.com [20:08] can you tell from what you see that it wasn't supported and a nono to download? [20:08] right... guess that falls under what rbasak said earlier (still there because reasons) [20:08] yeah, that's not ideal [20:08] compared to this mirror: http://ftp.acc.umu.se/mirror/cdimage.ubuntu.com/releases/ [20:08] if i went to .se instead of .de i would not use 15 now for sure [20:09] because they removed it there and that would catch my attention absolutely [20:09] that only shows you waht they host [20:09] not what is supported [20:09] unluckily i clicked on Germany and that's how i got 15... [20:09] i feel like you're missing the point altogether [20:10] no, i just don't have experience with this versioning scheme [20:10] no matter how the version numbers are assinged it's always a good idea to ask "how long is this supported?" :) [20:10] so i was thinking: "if 14.04 is still supported than 15 would be as well for sure" [20:11] and "why use 14.04 if i can get newer libs etc. in 15.04" [20:11] really, nothing to add here :) that's how it went [20:11] hehe [20:11] saw it, grabbed it, installed it [20:11] monsune: Ubuntu was early in the LTS thing, but many things in our ecosystem work the same way. Linux kernel versions for example. [20:12] There are intermediate Linux versions that are not supported, but ones either side that are, for exactly the same reason. [20:12] now i'm laughing too, shit happens :) will backup, wipe, reinstall with 14.04 and things will be good :) [20:12] To participate in our ecosystem you really just need to know to look up support lifetimes, sorry. [20:12] i just didn't realize about the LTS thing [20:12] and no doubt about it the HWE versioning is bloody confusing [20:13] You just fell in a gap by knowing enough to go straight to a mirror but not enough to look up support lifetimes. [20:13] For example start from www.ubuntu.com and you get to https://www.ubuntu.com/download/server which makes it clear. [20:13] of course i don't deny that it was solely my fault, not blaming anyone but myself, still i stand the ground with the versioning scheme being slightly confusing to noobs and it shouldn't be [20:14] we're also changing the HWE slightly for 16.04 LTS in a way that I hope makes it less confusing, once the older HWEs are finally gone :) https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/RollingLTSEnablementStack [20:14] monsune: the versioning scheme makes complete sense. It tells you when something was released. [20:14] monsune: it gives you no more information than that [20:14] i typed in google: ubuntu mirrors and clicked 3rd result: https://www.ubuntu.com/download/alternative-downloads [20:15] then i scrolled to select nearest mirror and that's it [20:15] maybe i would read up more if i wasn't tired and time pressured [20:16] monsune: you also didn't read the top of the page [20:16] i did [20:16] monsune: http://de.releases.ubuntu.com/, "the following release of Ubuntu are available" [20:16] it wasn't really convencing not to download 15.04 :) [20:16] monsune: again, just because a file is hosted on a website, that doesn't mean *anything* [20:17] why isn't there big, fat 15.04 listed in grey with *unsupported* tag? [20:17] that would really help some people imho [20:17] i've not heard of anyone else running into this problem [20:17] so everyone clearly knows what isn't supported anymore [20:19] heck, there is even 12.04 LTS available :) why wouldn't i believe that 15.04 was supported too? [20:19] because it's not listed on the 'following releases' list [20:19] you made a huge assumption about something fairly important [20:20] and those big names are for torrent so i skipped that completely as i wasn't using torrent to download - thus i ended up in mirrors and de mirror in particular [20:20] monsune: *what* are you talkinga bout? http://de.releases.ubuntu.com/ [20:20] monsune: read the first 5 lines [20:20] i might be just dumb but really, adding clear info there that 15.04/10 isn't supported anymore would help some people for sure [20:21] monsune: or, as is done now, only use ones that are listed [20:21] someone should look into download stats and see how many people download 15.04/10 [20:21] really, done now [20:22] i didn't use the ones listed because it says torrent there so i wasn't interested and didn't care to check why 15.x wasn't listed [20:22] how would we get download stats for mirrors we don't control? :) [20:23] i don't know, i thought it was possible somehow, like they send you stats, etc. [20:23] i'm 100% sure that the .de mirror is "poisoning" some people with 15.x every day :) [20:26] monsune: 15.04 on de.archive.ubuntu.com is snappy, not regular Ubuntu [20:27] what does snappy mean? [20:29] also, why wouldn't the ubuntu download page include tables from https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Releases? [20:29] "snappy" is an entirely new packaging format, see http://snapcraft.io/ for details there. [20:29] so it's so easy and clear to see what's supported, not supported, dates, etc. [20:29] It's using a different packaging system and makes use of transactional upgrades. Check out http://blog.dustinkirkland.com/2015/01/snappy-ubuntu-for-devices-year-of-linux.html [20:29] the 15.04 snappy thing is insanely unfortunate. that never should have been productized imho. [20:29] or at least a nicely visible link to that wiki [20:30] sarnold see? and i became a victim of it... [20:30] monsune: what's supported is easy and clear to see, see the list following "The following releases of Ubuntu are available:" [20:30] dasjoe that's just terrible, looks like i installed the worst ubuntu server version possible :) [20:31] dasjoe nope, available is just available together with others like 15.x :) [20:31] monsune: just use 16.04 for servers [20:31] "supported" would be the better word then [20:31] dasjoe i can't because lots of my php isn't ready for 7 [20:31] that's the major problem [20:32] and that's why i started to look for something "fairly recent but not ancient" and 15.x seemed logical, only that i missed the LTS meaning... [20:32] i wish there was 16.x with older php than php7, then i would install for sure [20:33] Just fix your PHP, or do what apparently most people do and make use of ondrej's PPA for 5.6 etc [20:33] trust me, there are more people breaking their head because of php7 [20:33] Keep in mind you'll be on your own when you're installing unofficial packages [20:33] dasjoe it's not only my php [20:33] and i'm not going to sit for a year or pay thousands to have it all updated [20:34] i think it's clear? [20:34] i just want 5.5 or 5.6 for now like many people [20:34] monsune: I've had to deal with ancient PHP stuff for some of my clients, we're using ondrej's PPA now [20:35] i will certainly give it a try [20:35] assuming it's a good idea to use PPA [20:35] which i might doubt a little [20:36] more and more people decide on centos+cpanel also just to be able to run php5 and php7 at the same time [20:37] Good for them, I guess [20:37] so i guess it's not the best idea to force people into php7 in ubuntu 16.04 [20:37] ubuntu would "profit" from php5 branch in 16.04 and i'm a clear example of such user [20:37] php5 would look pretty silly in 2021.. [20:37] You are free to use whichever PHP you want, you'll just not get official packages [20:38] i do agree sarnold but still, people can't just switch instantly [20:38] monsune: good thing 14.04 LTS is supported until 2019 :D [20:38] they often have custom solutions coded, coders gone long ago, they have to stick to it or pay a lot to have it re-written [20:38] aka "technical debt" [20:38] you get to pick when you pay it down [20:38] sarnold that's why i'm going with 14.04 LTS for sure now :) or hm... well... 16.04 plus PPA for 5.6? [20:39] also, networking is different in 16.04 [20:39] is it? [20:39] most people notice systemd first [20:39] hehe [20:39] he he [20:39] ok... 14.04 LTS for me :) [20:40] afaik FreeBSD ships 5.6, too [20:40] there is debian also of course [20:41] forcing php7 in 16.04 is same thing as forcing LXC in proxmox 4.3 - lots of crap there and people crying every day about issues they are having [20:41] as moving from openvz isn't either easy or hassle-free [20:42] and some people just can't afford experiments, it has to work fine, thus i rather stay back with 14.04 than risk money and time migrating stuff to php7 and deal with other issues [20:43] All you're doing is postpone the investment [20:45] dasjoe sure but i can at least control when i do invest and how much [20:45] i can slowly prepare for a change [20:46] meanwhile it has to be up and running without breaking my head [20:46] for same reason i dumped all openvz instead of making them lxc and just went for KVMs instead [20:47] http://php.net/supported-versions.php ← Hmm [20:47] well yeah [20:50] Here, a migration manual in a somewhat weird mix of English and German, it's just like MS-DOS 6.22 again: http://php.net/manual/de/migration70.php [20:52] thank you, i will certainly give it a read [20:52] what i meant is that i knew i had to migrate, it's just that i can't do this right away [20:53] so i would rather schedule and plan the works step by step [20:53] ...using older ubuntu because that's how maintainers wanted it [20:54] anyway it's not too bad with 5.6 and extended security fixes period [20:56] ubuntu 14.04.5 LTS till april 2019 and php 5.6 till january 2019 :) [20:56] interesting coincidence :) [20:57] so that's my real deadline for moving into php7 [21:24] monsune: two years isn't really that long a time ;) [21:47] can anyone help with any network traffic monitoring tool with ubuntu server 16.04 [21:49] mozart1893 console? [21:49] yes [21:50] do you need to investigate or just watch bw a bit? [21:52] monsune: i will like to monitor the bandwidth utilization and sometimes track the source of over-utilization aswell [21:52] i often use nload and iftop [21:54] monsune: many thanks.... [21:54] monsune: may i ask how they work.../ [21:54] also nethogs as it can show you the bw used by particular process [21:55] just try them and play around === nodouble` is now known as nodoubleg [21:55] you may begin with bmon anyway :) [21:56] iptraf has a lot of information if you want to dig deeper into the packet side of things [21:57] yes iptraf too of course :) he wanted some general overview of his bw so i didn't suggest iptraf [22:00] many thanks Pici.... [22:01] testing speedometer now :) nice gfx [22:01] i will try all out and see what suites my need most [22:01] that's right mozart1893 [22:09] Good evening [22:10] Guys, what do I do if I find out that nothing has been written to syslog for months? [22:11] panic [22:11] And beyond that? :) [22:11] * tarpman hides [22:14] Where do I find the configuration of syslog? [22:20] in /etc/syslog.conf? [22:20] Yeah, it wasn't there [22:21] * mpo42vr scratches head [22:21] Either I was very confused and switched to rsyslog or I was hacked [22:22] run rkhunter and stuff [22:22]