/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2022/06/07/#ubuntu-server.txt

=== shokohsc5 is now known as shokohsc
=== not_phunyguy is now known as phunyguy
=== nuccitheboss1 is now known as nuccitheboss
=== scoobydoo_ is now known as scoobydoo
faekjarzDo i need to run "do-release-upgrade -d" in order to upgrade from 20.04 to 22.04 LTS, now? (i kinda don't want to install a development release)09:14
lotuspsychje!ltsupgrade | faekjarz 09:20
ubottufaekjarz: Regular upgrades from the last but one LTS release to the latest LTS release, 22.04 "Jammy Jellyfish", are enabled days or weeks after 22.04.1 is released. This delay helps to ensure that any lingering issues are resolved before people upgrade production systems. If you'd prefer to upgrade now, use sudo do-release-upgrade -d09:20
faekjarzthanks, lotuspsychje09:22
faekjarzis there an actual schedule that could tell me when the .1 release is due? the release cycle page doesn't help09:23
lotuspsychjeaugust probably faekjarz 09:23
faekjarzhmm, k thx09:24
lotuspsychjeand for production servers, that would be reccomended to await .109:24
faekjarzaye! it's my home server and i have a fresh clonezilla backup from an hour ago - i shall boldly go... ;)09:27
lotuspsychjesee also the releasenotes before you go faekjarz 09:27
lotuspsychje!jammy09:27
ubottuUbuntu 22.04 (Jammy Jellyfish) is the 36th release of Ubuntu and the current !LTS release – Download at https://ubuntu.com/download :: Release notes at https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/jammy-jellyfish-release-notes :: Further schedule at https://ubottu.com/y/jj09:27
technoheadHi, anyone has setup Bind with chroot jail? Any decent guide which you can recommend me?10:54
odcnope, I deployed BIND in docker. Easier than a chroot!11:36
sdezieltechnohead: I put bind9 in a LXD container and add the following systemd hardening snippet to it: https://termbin.com/eqoq12:18
sdezieltechnohead: so no chroot but you can achieve something similar with systemd mount features (*Path=)12:19
=== leftyfb_ is now known as leftyfb
tewardsdeziel: the only way to fix d-r-u a-la #1977667 is to fix the underlying scripts so they don't exit in an error case.  Which is impossible with the postinst and a systemd call13:17
tewardthe error chain you have is, from inner to outer:13:17
sdezielteward: wait13:18
tewarddpkg error code ---> apt error code ---> d-r-u error code13:18
sdezielteward: I cannot even get d-r-u to abort the upgrade :)13:18
tewardsdeziel: it's been well known for eons that you can't 'abort' an upgrade mid-install mid-configuration13:18
tewardhence the "backup your stuff first" problem13:18
tewardsdeziel: my point is13:18
sdezielteward: d-r-u did the right thing by continuing (at least in my reproducing attempt)13:18
tewardsdeziel: i think you misunderstand the call chain13:18
tewardyou ARE aware that the configure steps happen *after* all the package installs/updates/etc. happen right?13:19
sdezielyep13:19
tewardand you ARE aware that when dpkg/apt fails to configure a package *it* in turn returns an error code, independent of d-r-u yes?13:19
tewardunless you are telling d-r-u to ignore error cases where dpkg/apt fails to install/configure which all happen at one command call, I don't see a way for d-r-u to 'ignore' the config failure13:20
sdezielthis is the part that I'm not 100% now because in my reproducing steps, nginx-light shows as "ii" in `dpkg -l` despite the error I introduced13:20
tewardbecause, IMO, if a package fails to configure on upgrade, that's a problem.13:20
tewardsdeziel: i'm past the nginx issue13:20
tewardsdeziel: as we already discussed in bug it's not an NGINX issue13:20
sdezielteward: yeah, we all know this has nothing to do with NGINX13:21
tewardthe underlying issue needs its own d-r-u bug IMO13:21
tewardnot continuing to compound on the nginx bug :P13:21
tewardmy point still stands regardless13:21
tewardlet's say this was Apache13:21
tewardor BIND13:21
tewardor $insert_server_package_here13:21
tewardsimilar config failures, same trigger case problem with a d-r-u failure13:21
tewardwhat OP discovered and you're seeing is an inherent apt/dpkg/subprocess forking error code handling issue13:22
sdezielteward: I took the liberty to try an reproduce the problem without changing the bug assignment ... maybe I should have moved it first, sorry. Even then, I didn't find a problem with d-r-u so AFAIK, there is no bug at all13:22
tewardsdeziel: i think the red herring error case is the problem13:22
tewardat the same time i don't see a way to "bypass" that is my thing13:22
tewardso ultimately I don't see this as a bug and the fact we're still digging is just spamming things :P13:22
teward*yawns* sorry i woke up grumpy13:22
tewardstill recovering from the COVID13:22
sdezielteward: should the "affects nginx" link be dropped from that bug?13:25
tewardi believe so, yes, as it's an "invalid" against NGINX.13:26
tewardthe bug needs a retitle though too13:26
tewardto not confuse people13:26
tewardagain, apologies if i seem hostile today, i'm just grumpy from the COVID.  most of the symptoms are gone, but i'm still sleeeeepy heh13:26
teward(unrelated: COVID sucks, so don't get it if you can avoid it)13:28
sdezielteward: I'll let the reporter deal with the retitle as this one seems to be coming from d-r-u automatic bug report or something13:33
tewardsdeziel: it's not a d-r-u reported bug13:33
tewardd-r-u is letting apt report the bug13:33
tewardthe bug report is the apt "install failed" bug13:34
tewardso this needs a LOT more love than just OP here13:34
tewardagain, this is how you and I understand the call chain but $AVERAGE_JOE won't13:34
sdezielwell, to be honest, I just noticed "The upgrade has aborted" followed by "A recovery will run now (dpkg --configure -a)" ;)13:36
ahasenackkanashiro: do you have that corosync bug # at hand?14:44
ahasenacki can't find it14:44
kanashiroahasenack, let me check14:45
ahasenackit's not even in https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/pending-sru.html, I thought it would be there14:46
kanashiroit was marked as server-todo I think14:47
ahasenackgot it14:48
ahasenackhttps://bugs.launchpad.net/charm-hacluster/+bug/187471914:48
ubottuLaunchpad bug 1874719 in corosync (Ubuntu Focal) "[SRU] Use the hostname as the node name instead of  hardcoded 'node1'" [Medium, In Progress]14:48
scortalhi18:08
=== bbezak_ is now known as bbezak
=== diddledani_ is now known as diddledani
=== blackboxsw_ is now known as blackboxsw
=== soren_ is now known as soren
=== Fossil_ is now known as Fossil
=== coreycb_ is now known as coreycb
=== tds5 is now known as tds
scortalhi18:58
kinghatmy server 20.04 time is off, is there a best practice for getting it back on time? 20:30
ahasenackkinghat: see if this helps: https://ubuntu.com/server/docs/network-ntp20:31
kinghatahasenack: 👍20:39
kinghatthink im back on track20:39
scortalhi all21:10
=== kostkon_ is now known as kostkon

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!