| Obscenity | after 3 failed installs on 3 different isos, i have to question the integrity of subiquity | 03:20 |
|---|---|---|
| Obscenity | is there a boot flag to use the old debian installer instead | 03:20 |
| tomreyn | Obscenity: did you both verify the iso checksums, and the data written to the installer media? which images did you use? what failed exactly? | 04:04 |
| Obscenity | well i tried the jammy daily first, then the jammy beta, and then the old 21.10 stable | 04:05 |
| Obscenity | it faled duing the entering of my username when asked | 04:05 |
| tomreyn | failed how? and you didn't answer the first question | 04:10 |
| Obscenity | no, i cantm and it has a popup that the installer failed, and i can send a report to canonical, which i did each time too | 04:36 |
| tomreyn | well, verify the checksums for downloaded iso and installer image writtern and see whether this helps. | 04:39 |
| Obscenity | i cant | 04:40 |
| Obscenity | i do have an idea of what to change though, so ill try that | 04:40 |
| tomreyn | if you'll be looking for support with this later, be sure to explain "i can't". | 04:47 |
| Obscenity | yeah i got it | 04:48 |
| Obscenity | subiquity crashes if i enter a mirror, then enter the user information screen | 04:48 |
| Obscenity | so no mirror | 04:48 |
| Obscenity | and i cant because the image is stored remotely on a VM Host | 04:49 |
| Obscenity | thats why, hah | 04:49 |
| Obscenity | it gives me a UUID that is not in valid UUID format | 04:49 |
| Obscenity | thats about it | 04:49 |
| tomreyn | what is "it" that gives you a UUID? | 04:50 |
| tomreyn | you should talk to whomanaged the VM Host to have them verify integrity of the .iso | 04:51 |
| tomreyn | *who manages | 04:51 |
| Obscenity | that would probably take several days, but it works now if i just dont use a mirror | 04:52 |
| Obscenity | https://www.virtualizor.com/ | 04:52 |
| Obscenity | that is "it" | 04:52 |
| tomreyn | this may be bug 1883401 | 04:55 |
| ubottu | Bug 1883401 in subiquity (Ubuntu) "crash due to bad custom mirror" [Low, Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1883401 | 04:55 |
| tomreyn | but your descriptions is so imprecise, it's hard to tell | 04:56 |
| Obscenity | ooof, abandoned bug from 2020 | 04:57 |
| Obscenity | unlucky | 04:57 |
| Obscenity | at least i can add the mirror back to apt later | 04:58 |
| tomreyn | there is also bug 1874248 and bug 1860352 | 04:58 |
| ubottu | Bug 1874248 in subiquity "stage-curthooks/001-configure-apt: SUCCESS: Status.FAIL" [Undecided, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1874248 | 04:58 |
| ubottu | Bug 1860352 in subiquity "User supplied mirror server not verified, no errors reported" [Undecided, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1860352 | 04:58 |
| Obscenity | 1860352 makes sense since https-transport is not installed by default, which is pretty insane if you ask me | 05:00 |
| tomreyn | i don't see why you're saying the first bug report was 'abandoned'. it was just considered low importance, possibly because the error is a result of a bad environmental configuration | 05:00 |
| Obscenity | i just dont know what Triaged means so I assumed it was kicked aside | 05:03 |
| tomreyn | package apt-transport-https is no longer needed for adding https support to apt since apt 1.5 | 05:04 |
| Obscenity | huh, when i dont add it i always get [Ign] or [Err] in the apt output | 05:05 |
| tomreyn | "Triaged" status is the state where a bug report is under examination. | 05:05 |
| tomreyn | it is unclear which ubuntu release or exact output you're referring to. | 05:08 |
| Obscenity | since as long as i remember, at least from 10.04 to 18.04 if not newer | 05:11 |
| Obscenity | im going to try it when im logged in and ill let you know | 05:11 |
| Obscenity | the output i mean | 05:11 |
| Obscenity | huh, totally works in 22.04 | 05:27 |
| === brlin_ is now known as brlin | ||
| mirespace | good morning | 07:34 |
| utkarsh2102 | mirespace: o/ | 07:40 |
| mirespace | hi utkarsh2102 o/ | 07:46 |
| ShellcatZero2 | Walex: What directory would you pass to debootstrap for a side-by-side install though? | 11:25 |
| athos | sdeziel: on the squid vs squid-openssl, I am not sure if it is just regarding historical reasons. I will dig around though :) squid-openssl was in main in impish though | 13:14 |
| Odd_Bloke | Hey folks, if we have a patch that we'd like to see backported to focal's systemd, what would the appropriate process be? I will file a bug, but I'm not sure if those are regularly reviewed. | 13:20 |
| ahasenack | in any case, it all starts with a bug | 13:23 |
| ahasenack | I think bugs with patches get a special tag even | 13:23 |
| lotuspsychje | Odd_Bloke: did you check the recent systemd bugs, to see if there's something similar? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/systemd/+bugs?orderby=importance&start=0 | 13:24 |
| ahasenack | and then ping in ubuntu-devel perhaps, as systemd is not under server | 13:24 |
| Odd_Bloke | lotuspsychje: Yup, no mention of it! | 13:27 |
| Odd_Bloke | ahasenack: Thanks! It's Foundations still, presumably? | 13:27 |
| ahasenack | you presume correctly | 13:27 |
| sergiodj | sdeziel: hey. I don't think it's historical, TBH. I also agree that we should probably stick to the openssl version because that seems to be the preferred crypto suite. as athos said, squid-openssl was in main and has been demoted to universe; I'm trying to find more info on why this happened | 14:26 |
| sdeziel | athos: oh, I had not seen this re squid-openssl in impish | 14:28 |
| sdeziel | sergiodj: cool, let me know if I can help in any way | 14:29 |
| sergiodj | squid-openssl has been added quite recently. upstream is still working on the openssl support TBH, so that's something we should consider before promoting the package to main again | 14:30 |
| sergiodj | sdeziel: thanks for bringing this up | 14:30 |
| sdeziel | yeah, I'd be curious to know why it was demoted that recently? | 14:39 |
| ahasenack | athos: sergiodj: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/jammy/amd64/squid-openssl | 16:45 |
| ahasenack | the "publishing" page for binaries | 16:45 |
| ahasenack | https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/issues/326 | 17:23 |
| ubottu | Issue 326 in openzfs/zfs "Support fallocate(2)" [Closed] | 17:23 |
| sergiodj | ahasenack: thanks. I couldn't find an explanation on the demotion in the page, though | 18:07 |
| sergiodj | sdeziel: so, the reason for the demotion was that squid-openssl is not an rdep for anything & it's not in a seed | 18:46 |
| sdeziel | sergiodj: ah, I see, thx | 18:47 |
| sergiodj | with that in mind, and knowing that upstream is still working on the patches to support openssl 3, I think a good plan ahead is to wait until upstream finishes working on the PR, backport its missing bits to squid on Jammy, and then work on getting squid-openssl into main | 18:48 |
| sdeziel | sergiodj: and realistically, that'd be for Jammy+1 right? | 18:49 |
| sergiodj | sdeziel: Jammy+1 would have an MIR, but I believe we should/could also aim for Jammy given that squid is an important package | 18:50 |
| sdeziel | sergiodj: that'd be nice indeed :) | 18:50 |
| sergiodj | I will write something about squid-openssl in the release notes | 18:50 |
| sergiodj | as suggested by ahasenack | 18:50 |
| sdeziel | sergiodj: if the plan is to have the OpenSSL one in main, will there be a demotion of the GnuTLS one? (I'd be in favor of minimal maintenance IMHO) | 18:57 |
| sergiodj | sdeziel: the best outcome would be to have a squid-gnutls package (in universe), and have squid link against openssl IMO. I will talk to the debian maintainer and see what he thinks | 18:58 |
| sdeziel | sergiodj: works for me | 18:59 |
| JanC | maybe also look at what is best supported upstream... | 21:11 |
| === eitteabs is now known as sbeattie | ||
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!