[04:40] <cpaelzer> good morning
[06:03] <lordievader> Good morning
[06:20] <cpaelzer> hiho lordievader
[06:20] <lordievader> Morning cpaelzer
[06:20] <lordievader> How are you doing?
[06:21] <cpaelzer> good, and you?
[06:21] <lordievader> Doing good here :)
[06:21] <cpaelzer> glad to hear that
[07:40] <Gargoyle> Hey there. If I manually remove a package with "apt remove some-package" does this prevent it from being installed again automatically in the future? (I now see it listed in dpkg --get-selections with "deinstall")
[07:41] <Gargoyle> I'm trying to recreate a scenario where php7.2 seems to have been, allegedly, automatically upgraded to 7.3RC.
[08:20] <DenBeiren> for some reason one of my machines is in read only filesystem.
[08:20] <DenBeiren> I guess there should be a forcefsck run on reboot
[08:20] <DenBeiren> is there a way to make it reboot and check?
[08:22] <hateball> DenBeiren: differs a bit depending on your version
[08:22] <DenBeiren> latest,.. 18.04.1
[08:23] <hateball> DenBeiren: you'd need to change kernel parameters to force
[08:24] <hateball> that said, systemd should notice it has failed and run an fsck itself
[08:25] <hateball> DenBeiren: are all partitions mounted ro ?
[08:26] <hateball> DenBeiren: basically these are your options https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd-fsck@.service.html
[08:37] <DenBeiren> the problem is that i have no options editing or creating any files
[08:37] <DenBeiren> since i am stuck in read only mode
[08:43] <cpaelzer_> DenBeiren: those are kernel commandline options consumed by systemd
[08:43] <cpaelzer_> DenBeiren: you can set them from grub or whatever your bootloader is
[08:43] <cpaelzer_> disk being readonly isn't preventing you to do that
[08:50] <DenBeiren> i'm afraid i don't understand what i should do,.. never had/did this before :s
[08:50] <hateball> DenBeiren: do you have physical access to the server?
[08:50] <hateball> by physical I mean can you interupt the boot process and get into grub
[08:50] <DenBeiren> no, not now,.. alls is done trough ssh
[08:53] <hateball> DenBeiren: is your /boot partition also mounted ro ?
[08:56] <DenBeiren> https://pastebin.com/biu1d2cM
[08:59] <DenBeiren> https://pastebin.com/yFKNs7sX
[09:01] <hateball> DenBeiren: run "mount |grep sda"
[09:02] <hateball> that should how /boot is currently mounted. if you can mount it rw, you can edit /boot/grub/grub.cfg manually to force fsck next reboot
[09:51] <DenBeiren> /boot/grub/grub.cfg is empty,... is that ok?
[09:51] <DenBeiren> oops
[09:51] <DenBeiren> i was wrong
[09:53] <DenBeiren> how should i edit grub? where and what?
[09:54] <blackflow> DenBeiren: looking at the context of the convo above, it appears you should edit that grub.cfg with any text editor and add fsck.mode=force to the vmlinuz kernel command line
[09:56] <blackflow> DenBeiren: in the first "menuentry 'Ubuntu' ....."  section, there's "linux" line above "initrd", at the bottom of the { } group. The "linux" line is the kernel command line.
[09:56] <blackflow> Add that fsck.mode=force at the end of that line, save the file, umount /boot and reboot
[09:57] <DenBeiren> here goes nothing ;-)
[09:58] <DenBeiren> in beaver we trust :-)
[10:11] <hateball> famous last words, it would seem
[10:37] <Gargoyle> I didn't think you were supposed to edit grub.cfg manually anymore?
[10:55] <blackflow> Gargoyle: you aren't. the user couldn't get to root and had the option to mount /boot separately for that one tiem fix and boot regularly.
[10:55] <blackflow> (being a remote server with no accses to grub menu itself)
[11:45] <DenBeiren> not last words hateball :-)
[11:45] <DenBeiren> it rebooted but i can't say for sure if it did the check
[11:45] <DenBeiren> my errors aren't gone in any case
[11:48] <blackflow> DenBeiren: but did you manage to boot regularly?
[11:49] <DenBeiren> it rebooted and came back up,..
[11:49] <DenBeiren> i'm not there with the machine to check the monitor
[11:49] <blackflow> what errors then?
[11:50] <DenBeiren> for example when i want to edit a file, sudo nano /etc/"tabkey" it gives me the following
[11:51] <DenBeiren> https://pastebin.com/jeSQMWLN
[11:53] <blackflow> DenBeiren: pastebin   mount | grep tmp     please?
[11:53] <Ussat> \o/ Xwiki server upgraded from 16.x --> 18.x
[11:54] <DenBeiren> https://pastebin.com/CaEiW5yY
[11:55] <blackflow> DenBeiren: and what about just `mount`, no grep?
[11:56] <DenBeiren> https://pastebin.com/Am0f9gLd
[11:56] <blackflow> DenBeiren: try   mount -o -remount,rw /
[11:57] <blackflow> DenBeiren: also please pastebin your /etc/fstab
[11:58] <Gargoyle> Do you have any kind of message in dmesg suggesting why / is being mounted ro?
[12:01] <DenBeiren> https://pastebin.com/CahVM1Bx
[12:03] <blackflow> "floppy:"  !!!
[12:04] <Gargoyle> ext2 !!!
[12:04] <Gargoyle> How old is this machine?
[12:05] <Gargoyle> Looks like it's a VM too. Do you control the hypervisor?
[12:05] <blackflow> DenBeiren: can you pastebin fstab?   Looks like something is not remounting root rw after root pivot.
[12:06] <Ussat> ext2...wow
[12:08] <hateball> it's not *that* long ago since ext2 was default on /boot if you installed with LVM :p
[12:09] <blackflow> Looks like Bionic according to uname
[12:10] <DenBeiren> https://pastebin.com/PqSxrNLL
[12:12] <blackflow> DenBeiren: typo on line 7? looks like no root mount in fstab, and that initial ro is never remounted
[12:12] <Gargoyle> is line 7 a copy and paste error?
[12:13] <blackflow> DenBeiren: hit enter after <pass>   on line 7
[12:13] <blackflow> also............ floppy? really?
[12:13] <hateball> dont copy that floppy
[12:20] <DenBeiren> hey, it's standard :-)
[12:20] <DenBeiren> i guess
[12:20] <blackflow> what!
[12:20] <DenBeiren> i can't edit the file,..
[12:20] <blackflow> DenBeiren: did you run that remount?
[12:21] <blackflow> of course you didn't. you users never read the support advice you ask for.       mount -o remount,rw /              and then you can edit stuff freely. edit fstab, fix line 7 and reboot for test. you're welcome.
[12:22] <DenBeiren> blackflow: of course i did,.. but the level of knowledge with us n00bs is never as high as you guys might expect ;-)
[12:24] <blackflow> you can always ask if something is not clear. that's what support is for ;)
[12:25] <Gargoyle> DenBeiren: Show us the remount command and the output.
[12:25] <DenBeiren> i was able to edit, found the typo and waiting to login after reboot atm
[12:25] <Gargoyle> ah. ok
[12:26] <DenBeiren> yep! seems like that did the trick guys and gals,..
[12:30] <DenBeiren> thx a lot for the help!
[13:12] <ahasenack> rbasak: hi, I have an sru question
[13:12] <ahasenack> I'm working on a fix for a bug, and it has been fixed in bionic+ already
[13:12] <ahasenack> rbasak: the fix I intend to apply to trusty and xenial is from upstream and is simpler
[13:12] <ahasenack> rbasak: but different from what is applied to bionic+
[13:13] <rbasak> I think that's fine
[13:13] <rbasak> As long as there isn't expected to be a user visible functional regression on upgrade
[13:13] <ahasenack> rbasak: the bionic one comes from debian, so changing that to the upstream one (better and simpler) adds to delta,
[13:13] <ahasenack> rbasak: and the debian fix relies on a config change, so backing that out now would mean another config change
[13:14] <ahasenack> rbasak: so I think leaving bionic alone is best at this time
[13:14] <rbasak> That sounds right to me
[13:14] <rbasak> Probably good to explain in the SRU description what you just said though.
[13:14] <ahasenack> agreed
[13:27] <v0lksman> hey all!  trying to figure out how to remove all packages installed from a particular source
[13:28] <v0lksman> running `grep Package: /var/lib/apt/lists/archive_name_*_Package but it's listing packages that aren't currently installed
[13:42] <rbasak> v0lksman: use dpkg-query to get a list of installed packages. Then xargs over "dpkg -s" or similar to look for Source:. grep-dctrl might be useful. If there is no Source: header, the source package name is the same as the binary package name.
[13:49] <sdeziel> v0lksman: less elegant an possibly showing some false positives but I usually use that: for p in $(dpkg -l | awk '/^ii/ {print $2}'); do apt-cache policy "$p" | grep -qF "ppa.launchpad.net/foo" && echo "$p"; done
[13:54] <Ussat> ubuntu 12.......srsly.....he is running 12
[13:54]  * Ussat cries
[13:56] <v0lksman> thanks guys...looking at options.
[13:56] <v0lksman> Ussat: hope that wasn't directed at me
[13:56] <Ussat> no, it was not
[13:59] <sdeziel> 12.04 is still supported via ESM so there is still a chance was not left there rotting
[15:00] <ahasenack> cpaelzer: I think I can add dep8 tests to that backuppc package
[15:00] <ahasenack> rbasak: in terms of an sru, adding a dep8 that doesn't exist in the development release, is that a no-no?
[15:00] <ahasenack> rbasak: scenario is bionic+ has the fix, but no dep8, and I'm adding the fix *and* a dep8 test for it to trusty and xenial
[15:01] <ahasenack> it's just the dep8 fix that isn't in the distros I'm not touching
[15:04] <rbasak> ahasenack: I think an upload to Cosmic (or Cosmic+1 as needed) to add the dep8 would be appreciated.
[15:04] <ahasenack> rbasak: sure, but would it block the sru?
[15:04] <rbasak> I wouldn't block an SRU just because Cosmic is frozen and therefore you can't add the dep8 righ tnow.
[15:04] <ahasenack> rbasak: I'm thinking weeks until that could happen
[15:04] <ahasenack> ok
[15:04] <ahasenack> that would be my intention, sorry for not making it clear. I would definitely add the dep8 test to c+1 when it opens
[15:05] <rbasak> Perhaps you could leave the upload for cosmic+1 ready somewhere and link to it in the bug, and explain that you can't do it now due to freeze?
[15:06] <ahasenack> sure
[15:06] <ahasenack> what about the releases in the middle?
[15:06] <rbasak> But yeah if you agree to put it in later, it doesn't make sense to me to block the SRU.
[15:06] <ahasenack> bionic and cosmic itself
[15:06] <rbasak> What is it, tough SRU question day today? :)
[15:06] <ahasenack> I've done an sru in the past which was about fixing an *existing* dep8 test, but not one to add one
[15:06] <ahasenack> sure :)
[15:06] <rbasak> I won't make you do the releases in the middle given that you've said the issue doesn't affect them.
[15:07] <ahasenack> ok, as I thought :)
[15:08] <ahasenack> I'll still see how tough adding the dep8 test will be, but from what I've seen just by writing the testing instructions, all that can be scripted easily
[15:08]  * rbasak tries to be pragmatic about these things; if the underlying reasons for a policy look like a bad trade-off, let's skip the policy :)
[15:08] <rbasak> (in a specific case for specific reasons only, of course; otherwise the policy should be questioned/changed first)
[15:18] <teward> rbasak: i saw your reply, and sarnold's on that bug.  It's a bit late in the Cosmic cycle to add that, so it'll get added in Dd-series
[15:18] <teward> (nginx --with-compat)
[15:20] <sam_w> rbasak: we're having some preseed issues with 14.04, install completes fine but apt is left in a funky state due to shim: https://www.irccloud.com/pastebin/2uSLUZYU/ manually upgrading dpkg to 1.17.5ubuntu5.8 over 1.17.5ubuntu5 works... is this something we'll just have to add as a postinstall task or something or is there a better fix?
[15:27] <rbasak> sam_w: not sure why you're asking me?
[15:27] <rbasak> sam_w: that's interesting though. You do need the newer dpkg from trusty-updates first it seems if you want to install other things from trusty-updates. I'm not sure what mechanism exists (if any) to make sure that dpkg is updated before attempting to install shim.
[15:28] <rbasak> sam_w: is the newer dpkg available in the same apt repository? IOW are you using a custom hacked mirror or something, or the official upstream repositories there?
[15:28] <teward> rbasak: wasn't that a known upgrade-blocker a long time ago in the 14.04 -> 16.04 blocker there?
[15:28] <teward> i coulda sworn we had some kind of upgrade-blocking evil like that at that cycle
[15:28] <rbasak> I don't remember, but it would affect release upgrades too I think.
[15:29] <sam_w> rbasak: I think kierank was talking to you about it the other day? Apologies if not!
[15:34] <rbasak> sam_w: I remember a conversation about preseeding and hacking an apt repository but not about shim!
[15:34] <rbasak> sam_w: conclusion in #ubuntu-devel is that it's a bug. Please could you file one against shim, and tag it "regression-update"?
[15:34] <sam_w> rbasak: no hacked mirror, it's just in trusty-updates
[15:35] <sam_w> rbasak: sure
[15:35] <rbasak> Yeah I'm told it should declare a Pre-Depends, and doesn't, for some complicated reasons due to how it got there.
[18:36] <ahasenack> hm, with bileto, do I need one ticket per ubuntu release?
[18:36] <ahasenack> looks like yes
[18:36] <ahasenack> even though a ppa can hold packages for multiple releases
[18:44] <RoyK> !bileto
[18:48] <ahasenack> RoyK: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bileto
[18:48] <ahasenack> and bileto.ubuntu.com
[19:25] <xnox> ahasenack, it's the best recommended practice, yes. one ticket per ubuntu release.
[19:26] <xnox> multi-release publish is hard
[19:38] <ahasenack> I don't use it for publishing, just running dep8 tests in all arches and also the dependent tests
[19:38] <RoyK> xnox: it should be easy if a ticket could be marked with all relevant releases