=== unixeng668314 is now known as unixeng66831 [04:37] Hi, I have a laptop with both an intel i915 and NVIDIA GT 525M running ubuntu 24.04, its supposed to be using the intel card by default and then use the nouveau driver for the nvidia card.. unfortunately, something is wrong and when I run glxinfo I receive "Xlib: extension "GLX" missing on display ":0"." any ideas how to get glx working? [05:08] ardy: run: echo $XDG_SESSION_TYPE [05:08] see what it says. === Gallomimia- is now known as Gallomimia [05:56] all, I am using kubuntu 24.04 with i915 drivers and I'm not getting a glx display [05:57] I was before but then I attempted to install the nvidia drivers, that messed everything up.. and now I can't go back [06:01] ardy: you need to go to TTY and uninstall nvidia driver. [06:01] I have [06:01] and? [06:01] no luck [06:02] "ardy@laptop:~$ inxi -G [06:02] Graphics: [06:02] Device-1: Intel 2nd Generation Core Processor Family Integrated Graphics [06:02] driver: i915 v: kernel [06:02] Device-2: NVIDIA GF108M [GeForce GT 525M] driver: N/A [06:02] Device-3: Microdia Laptop_Integrated_Webcam_2HDM driver: uvcvideo [06:02] in TTY run: dpkg -l | grep -i nvidia [06:02] see what you get there. [06:04] but when I type "apt purge nvidia-*" I get this.. [06:04] ardy@laptop:~$ sudo apt purge nvidia-* [06:04] Reading package lists... Done [06:04] Building dependency tree... Done [06:04] Reading state information... Done [06:04] Note, selecting 'nvidia-driver-550-server' for glob 'nvidia-*' [06:06] that's not what i asked. [06:07] Note, selecting 'nvidia-utils-470' for glob 'nvidia-*' [06:07] Note, selecting 'nvidia-utils-510' for glob 'nvidia-*' [06:07] Note, selecting 'nvidia-utils-515' for glob 'nvidia-*' [06:07] Note, selecting 'nvidia-utils-520' for glob 'nvidia-*' [06:07] Note, selecting 'nvidia-utils-525' for glob 'nvidia-*' [06:08] sorry was banned for pasting [06:12] ok so I removed all the packages that showed up with "sudo dpkg -l | grep -i nvidia" [06:16] Hi all, I am failing to get glx to work with the i915 drivers with kubuntu 24.04. This happened after attempting to install the nvidia drivers. It was suggested to me to remove all the packages associated with Nvidia which I did, then I rebooted, still no luck.. any help would be appreciated [06:19] I believe the person helping me was diogeness [06:49] Hi, I'm trying to set my Ubuntu-based distros Update Servers, to HTTPS only update servers, in Software Sources, I set my update server to a US-based, HTTPS update mirror. However when I actually update in Terminal, it still is pining a HTTP update server, how do I fix this? In the past, setting a HTTPS update server, sent all updates via HTTPS. [06:51] hi [07:02] HEllo [07:02] can anybody help me set HTTPS-only updates for my Ubuntu os? [07:19] hello? [07:20] Trying to set my update servers URLs to HTTPS, but Ubuntu is ignoring the new mirrors for just the security packages URL [07:20] I set it in update sources to use HTTPS, but then it doesnt connect [07:20] In older versions of Ubuntu, I set a custom update mirror, and it worked, perfectly === root is now known as Guest5945 [07:35] hi [07:36] hello? [07:38] hey [07:39] welcome to the chatroom, what do u need guidance on [07:45] Hi, I borked my system by installing the nvidia-drivers via the shell-script provided by Nvidia, I was able to recover most things by purging and reinstalling the kernel, modules & headers (6.8.0-41-generic) but X11 XGL and EGL is broken [07:46] well, do you know why It got borked? [07:47] not really, it failed to compile the dkms drivers [07:48] I tried to reinstall various mesa packages but to no avail [07:49] at that poin't i'd re-install [07:49] personally, ask Perplexity AI [07:49] I was afraid ot that... [07:52] Or try to uninstall the drivers? [07:54] Guest38: Are you doing this on 24.04? If that's the case, you might just not be looking in the right places for mirrors (which is /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ubuntu.sources going forward). [07:54] yeah I thought of that, I did check there [07:54] Firstly, in the past, simply using the "Software Sources" GUI tool to pick a HTTPS mirror, would change the Security.ubuntu URL TOO to also use the new mirror url, now, the security.ubuntu url stays unchanged [07:55] I can't even find any other security package URLs, other than the official on [07:55] one [07:55] Not sure about the GUI, but the config is either in /etc/apt/sources.list or /etc/apt/sources.list.d/*.{sources,list} - make sure they're OK, then run apt update and you should be golden. [07:55] In the Ubuntu Mirrors list, it doesnt mention security urls, just the main packages like https://mirror.pilotfiber.com/ubuntu/ [07:56] I don't know of any security URLs other than the official one, using the GUI used to set it for me [07:57] Here's a shell recipe to help you find the possible files: grep '^[^#]' $(find /etc/apt -type f $ -iname '*.sources' -o -iname '*.list' $ ) [07:57] I found the sources file [07:57] I just dont have a HTTPS update server to input into it [07:58] Well, you can start with archive.ubuntu.com & security.ubuntu.com [07:59] YEah but those are deafult, and dont support HTTPS [07:59] back to square 1 [07:59] I've read for mirrors list, and heres an example of all I see https://mirror.servaxnet.com/ubuntu/, theres no security.X versions for mirrors that I can find! [07:59] I cant find the security URLs other than the main one, which doesnt use https [08:01] My bad - I thought they had enabled those recently, but it must still be in progress. [08:03] does the update servers frequently drop https support when new versions come out or something? [08:04] because in the past, i was using update servers with https for security updates, too , like even 6 months ago on 22.04 [08:06] In the software sources GUI, tab "other software" it shows something checked using http archive.ubuntu .com [08:08] That seems unlikely to me, but there might be factors which cause a mirror to do that. [08:08] What do you mean? [08:08] In the past, I set a mirror, and all updates would use the new server, now, the security.ubuntu.com url, never changes even when I change the mirrors [08:09] there is really no magic going on there. all relevant files are in /etc/apt/sources.list.d [08:09] they moved to a new location in 24.X ubuntu [08:10] But anyway, I used to not even need to edit the sources file, just using the GUI tool worked, these days, It seems the security.ubuntu url WONT CHANGE even though I set a new mirror [08:10] make sure /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ubuntu.sources and maybe other files are the way you want it. do an sudo apt update [08:10] and it will work the way it is setup in those files [08:10] Why did Ubuntu literally take us BACKWARDS in functionality compared to OLDER versions? Seriously, using HTTP in 2024 as defauly makes me question the devs sanity [08:11] if you find a bug in the GUI try [08:11] !bug [08:11] If you find a bug in Ubuntu or any of its official !flavors, please report it using the command « ubuntu-bug » - See https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ReportingBugs for other ways to report bugs. [08:11] yeah but I dont know of ANY other security.ubuntu.com alternatives [08:11] IDK if its a bug, or just how Ubuntu works now [08:11] that URL never supported HTTPs [08:11] I see plenty of mirrors listed online and in the GUI [08:11] yeah exactly, tahts why I'd change to a mirror which did use HTTPS [08:12] also archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu and security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu are the same anyway [08:12] but now I cant find any which change the security.ubuntu url, to anything else, using HTTPS which is my goal [08:12] ok [08:14] any ideas? [08:15] use any mirror and the the security URL for it [08:15] idk what the security urls are [08:15] for any mirror [08:15] and i dont now how to find out either [08:15] I've not seen any listed, and ive looked at 10 mirrors [08:16] I've tried guessing security.X into the urls, and it never connects/invalid url [08:16] https://p.haxxors.com/sources.txt [08:16] I feel like this should be extremely easy and automatic [08:16] this uses my mirror as an example [08:16] ( /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ubuntu.sources ) [08:16] I cant belive modern computing, is this difficult to acheive basic update HTTPS [08:16] there is no real need for HTTPs on the archives [08:16] so if you want to use it there is some manual editing required [08:17] Where can I find more security mirrors urls [08:17] Similar to yours [08:17] In thet past, It used to be automatically handled by the Software Sources Ubuntu GUI tool [08:17] https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+archivemirrors [08:17] yes but I dont see any of those mention the lower "security" package URL [08:18] https://mirror.hnd.cl/ubuntu/dists/noble-security/ [08:18] that exists on every mirrir [08:18] mirror [08:18] so you can use any mirror. the only difference in the past was that the official security URL synced more often [08:19] Look at this one for example, vhttps://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+mirror/mirrors.tscak.com-archi [08:19] ok [08:19] synced more often... than what? How often does it sync now [08:19] it is the same server now [08:20] im so confused [08:20] what do you mean its the same server now [08:20] compared to what? [08:20] and im sure there is a recommendation on how often to sync your mirrors [08:20] but you have to trust those external mirrors to do that anyway [08:20] How do I find these noble-security/ mirror, URLs [08:21] Hmmm, so which Mirror do U think I should use that is responsible enough to sync its security patches [08:21] it should be kind of clear from my examle? https://ANYMIRROR.com/ubuntu/dists/noble-security/ [08:22] you can click on the name of the mirrror like https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+mirror/mirror.gsl.icu-archive [08:22] it will show you if it is up to date [08:23] so for this one https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+mirror/mirrors.tscak.com-archive [08:23] the security url would be ... wait... is the URI the same? [08:23] https://p.haxxors.com/sources.txt [08:23] yes [08:23] In this example, the URL is the same [08:24] oooo lol, I wonder then why the Software UPdates GUI doesnt change it? [08:24] no idea. i never used that GUI [08:24] Its built into Ubuntu [08:24] It changes the update mirrors [08:24] i know that it exists [08:25] And it used to change the security URI/URLs also [08:25] i just prefer to use the terminal [08:25] but now seemingly doesnt [08:25] makes me worried im going to brick it or something... [08:25] if there is a bug you should report it [08:27] IDK if its a bug or not lol [08:27] Ill report it tho [08:27] thank you, mentioning that its the same URI/URL for both sources, really set my mind at ease and fixed it [08:27] I now have a HTTPS enabled security updates, thank you very much internet friend :) [08:27] yw 🙂 [08:28] now that thats done, what are you working on mate? [08:29] if you just want to chat we have #ubutnu-discuss for Ubuntu realted chat or #ubunti-offtopic for anything else [08:29] here we try to stay on the support questions topic [08:53] is upgrading to Ubuntu 24.04 LTS allowed today? [08:54] it was never forbidden [08:54] but the updater tool should offer it again now [08:56] sudo do-release-upgrade [08:56] Checking for a new Ubuntu release [08:56] Please install all available updates for your release before upgrading. [08:57] good advice [08:57] why does it say this? I've literally installed all available updates [08:57] sudo apt update && sudo apt full-upgrade [08:57] after that try a reboot. start the upgrade [08:58] I just did that, it installed nothing [08:58] The following packages have been kept back: [08:58] says this however [08:58] 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 9 not upgraded. [08:59] if kept back packages block a release upgrade that is a bug really [08:59] but you can fix that with: sudo apt upgrade package1 package2 ... [09:00] any command to upgrade them all at once [09:00] without going off each one by one [09:00] see above [09:00] This command "sudo apt update && sudo apt full-upgrade" did not upgrade them [09:01] try to read all my messages === anydeskboy35 is now known as anydeskboy_ [11:33] i had ubuntu jammy i think installed and i recently upgraded to noble. since then, i keep getting these errors when running apt update. E: Failed to fetch https://mirror.hetzner.com/ubuntu/packages/dists/noble-updates/main/binary-arm64/Packages 404 Not Found [IP: 2a01:4ff:.... 443] [11:34] i dont think it's a hetzner issue because they're pretty serious and it's been like this for too long for them not to notice and fix it [11:34] ideas? [11:40] Try the official ports mirror? [11:40] http://ports.ubuntu.com/ [11:45] Hi all [11:45] uf: https://status.hetzner.com/incident/43b5f083-cb30-4c01-b904-b611206eb172 [11:49] must have missed that.. thanks [11:50] though security updates should probably be retrieved directly from http://ports.ubuntu.com/ [11:50] (to not have to wait until mirroring takes place to receive critical updates) [11:51] whats the sources.list content for that will be? [11:53] http://ports.ubuntu.com/ noble-security ... [11:54] what about the signed-by? [11:57] the key should be on the keyserver.ubuntu.com keyserver, which supports hkp and http/https [11:58] it's probably just Signed-By: /usr/share/keyrings/ubuntu-archive-keyring.gpg [12:12] hello [12:15] hi - this bug has effected kubuntu and ubuntu for years : https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/network-manager-openvpn/+bug/1993634 [12:15] -ubottu:#ubuntu- Launchpad bug 1993634 in network-manager-openvpn (Ubuntu) "network-manager-openvpn: --cipher option deprecated in OpenVPN 2.6, no option to set suggested --data-ciphers flag instead" [Undecided, Confirmed] [12:15] t means you cannot connect to an openvpn server running 2.6.x (everything below 2.6 is EOL now) with network maanger [12:15] you have to edit a netplan file, but if you then edit the vpn profile in network manager you lose your edit and break vpn access [12:16] currently no ubuntu staff are assigned to this [12:16] who should I assign it to ? [12:16] as its really annoying [12:33] i.e - which ubuntu developer maintains network manager? [12:33] I mena the network manager package) [12:42] yossarianuk: apt show network-manager |grep @ [12:42] thanks [13:58] i just kicked the upgrade from 22 to 24, i hope it will go well [13:58] 22.04 to 24.04 [14:03] yep [14:03] I removed ntfs-3g because I was getting slow read/writes and was told it's managed by the kernel now. And now I can't mount my external drive? [14:05] leftyfb, btw it already stopped because of postgress, it wanted me to remove it or something but it was marked not to be removed apparently, removed it manually and trying again [14:06] postgresql-10 [14:09] gebbione: postgresql-10 is no longer a supported package in ubuntu [14:11] "Timing buffered disk reads: 56 MB in 3.01 seconds = 18.60 MB/sec" lol [14:11] The package 'postgresql-12' is marked for removal but it is in the removal deny list. [14:11] another one [14:12] is there a command to find all these conflicts before running the update? [14:12] it take a while to restart it [14:12] gebbione: remove all 3rd party packages and ones from old ubuntu releases [14:12] postgresql-12 is from ubuntu 20.04 [14:12] not sure why you have that and 10 installed on ubuntu 22.04 [14:13] the release upgrader writes a log, which lists "Foreign" packages. this may or may not be a complete list. [14:13] leftyfb, this machine has more than 13 years history [14:13] tomreyn, i m going to check [14:13] gebbione: sounds like a perfect time for a fresh install [14:14] leftyfb, if i had prepared somethink like an ansible repo with all the stuff i need then i would [14:14] but i m too lazy [14:15] "Timing buffered disk reads: 60 MB in 3.33 seconds = 18.01 MB/sec" idk what's causing the slowness... [14:18] mandem0110: we don't either, so unless you have a support question and want to describe what you're doing and what your environment is, posting this here is not going to get you anywhere, and only adds noise. [14:20] Right tomreyn let me explain... [14:22] I'm using a RPI5 and was told the other day ntfs-3g was no longer supported and mounting is now in the kernel. So I removed big_writes as it was still slow with the USB3 external drive. Now I removed ntfs-3g, removed the whole mount and mounted with sudo mount /dev/sdb2 /mnt/2tb -t ntfs3 but it's still really, really slow. Timing buffered disk reads: 60 MB in 3.41 seconds = 17.62 MB/sec [14:24] i believe ntfs-3g is still supported on current releases (but could be wrong - did you check?). however, there is in-kernel support now (ntfs3). [14:24] tomreyn, what about obsolete ones, Foreign look fine as packages [14:24] tomreyn: I mounted with ntfs-3g but that was better but still, it would go fast then really slow. Tried the ntfs3 and that's a whole lot worse. [14:25] you're accessing an ntfs via usb on a raspi, it won't get fast on this hardware. [14:25] I have a USB3 to SATA dock and a 4TB drive in, that works. lol [14:26] So you're wrong. [14:26] gebbione: nothing that's listed in "Foreign" is fine. apt-forktracer and deborphan can identify some leftover packages. [14:28] mandem0110: just use a different file system, that'll improve things a lot already. [14:28] Yeah.. no. I need to use it on Windows. [14:28] tomreyn, i have stuff that is essential for me https://bpa.st/MNB4Q [14:28] is there a document that outlines ubuntu release versioning? CONTEXT: the signifigance/difference between *.04 and *.10? 22 Vs 23? [14:28] mandem0110: https://p.haxxors.com/tz4mghq1.txt [14:28] like docker/thunderbird nvidia stuff etc [14:29] so with a proper file system things should improve [14:29] ravage: congrats... [14:29] Like I just said, I need to use this on Windows. So can't use ext4. [14:29] ok. i wont go with that passive aggressive vibe. good luck [14:30] ? [14:30] gebbione: i'm just saying that there's no supported upgrade path with packages and package versions installed that are not part of the original ubuntu release. [14:31] i dont remember how the postgres upgrade works usually. but i think it just keeps the old version. and then you need to upgrade it and delete the old version [14:31] tomreyn, ok but what if i want to keep them? i mean postgress i dont need but some listed here i dont want them touched. They must be installed through deb maybe [14:31] if you just remove the packages without purging it the data should remain [14:32] but make sure you have a full backup of everything anyway [14:32] never do such a big upgrade without one [14:32] gebbione: it could work nevertheless, or, maybe more likely, not. you can uninstall software and reinstall it post-upgrade. or you can do what was previously sugggested: a fresh install - certainly a good idea if this system has been through multiple previous release upgrades. [14:33] hi folks [14:33] hello johnfg [14:35] !yy.mm | olspookishmagus [14:35] olspookishmagus: Ubuntu version numbers are: YY.MM (YY=release year,MM=release month). Each year sees two releases, so just specifying YY is imprecise. See also https://www.ubuntu.com/about/release-cycle [14:35] !lts | olspookishmagus [14:35] olspookishmagus: LTS means Long Term Support. LTS versions are supported for 5 years on the desktop and server. The latest LTS version of Ubuntu is !Noble (Noble Numbat 24.04). Ubuntu !flavors may have different support durations, check their release notes for information. [14:35] I stil haven't upgraded to 24.04, due to some perceived problems & bugs, & hoping that they'll soon be solved and crushed. [14:35] upgrades are enabled [14:36] tomreyn, sounds like it will have to be another time... a complete re-install needs a list of all config and apps i need ... :( [14:36] that is a good plan anyway [14:36] you should always have that [14:40] olspookishmagus: did the above (by ubottu) answer your questions, yet? [14:45] So, according to this: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-release/2024-September/006230.html the problem isn't fixed, and is making me thing to just wait, as I thought. [14:45] s/thing/think [14:45] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-gcp/+bug/2078720 [14:45] -ubottu:#ubuntu- Launchpad bug 2078720 in linux-gcp (Ubuntu) "Upgrading from jammy to noble results in a linux-headers package being in a broken state" [Undecided, Confirmed] [14:46] https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/upgrades-to-ubuntu-24-04-1-lts-are-enabled-again/47920 [14:46] misleading title, btw, 'This bug was fixed in the package apt - 2.4.13' [14:47] gebbione: when in this situation i'd get a list of manually installed packages (and snaps) and review which of those i want to have again, see where to get them (post install). i'd also check my backups (or tar at the very least /etc and /usr/local and /home) and then cherry pick configurations from that on the new installation. [14:48] gebbione: ansible is another option, of course, but if you just maintain this system or just a small number then it may not be worth it. [14:50] johnfg: if you were to follow the thread ("messages sorted by...thread") on the mailing list you were pointing to, you'd notice an update had been posted there, too. [14:51] Ah, okay, sorry I didn't pull to the end of the thread. [14:51] no worries ;) [15:09] * mandem0110 salutes the support :) [15:18] i don't understand why 2 of the 3 pc's with the same sources.list file download and upgrade packages while one does not [15:20] !phasedupdated | eelstrebor [15:20] Since Ubuntu 21.04, APT may hold back some updates on some systems while they are being phased in. This is called "phased updates". See https://ubottu.com/y/phased and https://help.ubuntu.com/community/PhasedUpdates for more info. [15:21] it has nothing to do with phasing [15:21] Failed to fetch http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/pool/main/t/thunderbird/thunderbird_115.15.0%2bbuild1-0ubuntu0.22.04.1_amd64.deb Connection failed [IP: 185.125.190.81 80] [15:21] that looks like a local connection problem [15:21] or firewall that blocks something [15:22] i can web surf just fine and dns is working just fine. the pc i'm having trouble with is the one connected to irc right now [15:27] if apt update tells me what packages are ready for upgrade why doesn't apt upgrade fetch and install the packages? doesn't the upgradable package list come from the same server that apt fetches them from? [15:28] all 3 pcs go through the same firewall so the firewall shouldn't be an issue [15:31] eelstrebor: resolvectl status | nc termbin.com 9999 [15:41] https://termbin.com/pgi6 [15:44] eelstrebor, can you try a : 'sudo apt autoclean && sudo apt clean' and 'sudo apt-get update' again ? [15:48] it seems like a network problem [15:48] eelstrebor: are you wired or wireless? [15:48] eelstrebor: server or desktop? [15:48] this pc is wired direct to the router [15:49] eelstrebor: server or desktop? [15:50] it seems that apt clean fixed the problem. i've never had this issue over the years that i've been using ubuntu so it's left me scratching my head why this is the second time this year that this has happened [15:50] leftyfb, server [15:51] eelstrebor: and you're trying to install thunderbird graphical email client on a server? === unixeng668312 is now known as unixeng66831 [15:58] yes [16:02] so, not server then. It's running a desktop [16:21] Since upgrading from 20.04 to 24.04 I'm seeing a lot of issues with caching cifs. Is cifs-utils still needed, or is there kernel support now? I install cifs-utils and kernel-generic and setup my samba share in fstab with `iocharset=utf8,noserverino,_netdev` along with the uid/gid and credentials. It definitely might be an application issue / memory leak, but thought I'd ask here for this angle [16:31] Hi . How can I install ubuntu. [16:31] I have windows on my laptop [16:32] Blankspace: what have you found by looking so far? [16:32] Bootable pendrive [16:32] And virtual box [16:32] ok [16:32] Is there a link which has all the steps [16:33] For a noob. [16:33] I thought I would get a better link here [16:33] Blankspace: https://ubuntu.com/tutorials/install-ubuntu-desktop#1-overview [16:33] good talk [16:40] to [16:40] yo [17:19] hello [17:20] Can somebody help me with this? ( Failed creating instance record: Instance type "virtual-machine" is not supported on this server: KVM support is missing (no /dev/kvm) ). In anbox cloud [17:20] Guest25: your server doesn't support KVM [17:20] Guest25: if it's a cloud server it's probably a VM to begin with [17:21] Yes, but is there any way I can get around this problem? [17:21] Yes, it is a cloud server. [17:21] Guest25: it's very unlikely to have KVM support then [17:21] its probably already a kernel virtual machine [17:21] so use the other type of vm... [17:22] forgot what it's called, but the kind that doesnt use kernel module [17:22] or maybe you could use distrobox instead, depends what you're trying to accomplish [17:23] Hi, I have created a social network that has absolute anonymity and freedom of speech! [17:23] Can you please see what else needs to be added? [17:23] Website https://dkon.app [17:23] By the way, there is an API for developers! [17:24] I want to set up the launch of social networking applications through Anbox Cloud ) [17:24] I want to set up the launch of social networking applications through Anbox Cloud [17:27] Thank you! Can you advise which virtual machine would be suitable? Nowhere is there written about support for KVM [17:31] Maybe there is a way to run it somehow without KVM support? [17:33] Guest25: without knowing exactly what you're trying to do it's hard to know what to suggest [17:36] I install Unbox Cloud. Everything installed fine, no errors. Now I'm trying to create a virtual machine in it, but it says this error with KVM [17:36] *Anbox [17:38] In general, I need to launch applications eventually, virtual machines are not needed. === Sidewyz1 is now known as Sidewyz === he1 is now known as hel === Sidewyz1 is now known as Sidewyz === Sidewyz1 is now known as Sidewyz === tomaw_ is now known as tomaw === romulux is now known as romulux__off [19:38] zzZzzZzZZZz === romulux__off is now known as romulux [20:23] Suupp [20:23] Hey === five61848033910 is now known as five6184803391 [21:10] Hello, can anyone help troubleshoot why dnsmasq broke after I upgraded to 24.04.1? It runs fine if I start it in a shell, but the systemd service that calls the init.d service fails without a meaningful error === dynorsau is now known as backtomanhood === andymandias_ is now known as andymandias [22:26] Gi === unixeng668313 is now known as unixeng66831 === Dieu is now known as yuta === unixeng668318 is now known as unixeng66831 [22:47] Gello. === unixeng668312 is now known as unixeng66831 === BarnabasDK_ is now known as BarnabasDK === alucardromero7 is now known as alucardromero [23:01] https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/7twzRPWNrB/ [23:01] why do the apt kernel install all of a sudden compile two modules and sign them - then throw away one of them? [23:02] .. or why do we need to compile them at all? [23:07] it seems to *say* why? [23:07] because it signs them? [23:08] it also says afterwards that what was already in the kernel is a binary 1:1 match [23:10] so I think the artifact produced by the ubuntu build servers is exactly the same as what apt built for me [23:16] whatever was already there was exactly the same indeed (whether it was from the Ubuntu kernel package or from a previous DKMS build on your system I don't know) [23:17] generally speaking, you shouldn't install the zfs-dkms package on Ubuntu, unless you compile your own kernels [23:37] JanC, removed - thanks [23:39] huh [23:40] the zfs-dkms package will build an updated module every time ubuntu pushes a new kernel, based on the version of zfs you have installed (2.2.2 in this case) It has little to do with "compiling your own kernel" [23:40] your own kernel module then [23:40] in this case for zfs [23:41] thats what the zfs-dkms package does [23:41] yep [23:41] But I don't know why I had it installed [23:41] is it a fileserver, or are you doing zfs on root? [23:41] just a lappie [23:42] zfs on root [23:42] not the fastest - but a tradeoff I am happy to do in order to get the rest of the utilities in zfs [23:42] depending on what feature flags you have enabled on "zfs on root" it may or may not boot with the version of zfs that ubuntu ships with [23:43] it does :-) just did [23:44] you removed the package, and dkms status says you have no modules installed? [23:46] yes, but dkms-zfs never did anything since I did not change the signing key or the code - so it produced a binary identical artifact to the one already in the kernel [23:46] -> it does not install that [23:54] ok [23:54] but you are correct - had I fetched a newer version of zfs - and this had updated the file system, then a rollback to an older version of the driver - could get you into some hot water