January 2021 - openSUSE Bugs - openSUSE Mailing Lists

[Bug 1179170] grub2 efi posttrans update-bootloader script fails
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 11 Jan '21

11 Jan '21

https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1179170 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1179170#c8 Michael Chang <mchang(a)suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |ddiss(a)suse.com, | |heming.zhao(a)suse.com Flags| |needinfo?(ddiss(a)suse.com), | |needinfo?(heming.zhao@suse. | |com) --- Comment #8 from Michael Chang <mchang(a)suse.com> --- (In reply to Raymund Will from comment #7) > [in reverse order... ;)] > 1. efibootmgr-17 (available from [1]) already has > `efi_set_verbose(opts.verbose - 2, stderr);` > in it's "verbosity handling", so if you try that, please use (at least) > '-vvv'. The verbose setting seem to only apply to efibootmgr itself and did not propagate to the debug verbosity of libefivar. I am afraid it doesn't help much if we have to go down further to check what is doing the real work. > 2. no, I have no recollection of or other idea about what could be going on, > but would be interested to learn, whether efibootmgr-17 would make any > difference! OK. It would be great if you can provide efibootmgr-17 for reference. > 3. is it be possible, that this is a "reused" installation, which has > been upgraded at least once? @David, Would you please help to clarify on this ? > Or are there other explanations for the LVM-related warnings in the log? For this I set needinfo to lvm maintainer (heming.zhao(a)suse.com) @Heming, Would you please have a look on the lvm warings here ? > 4. do we need to look into those "leaked file descriptors"? These warnings are indeed harmless but to eliminate the warnings we can consider to include this commit in openSUSE and SLES. https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/grub.git/commit/?id=42acdd3b405c44d08439a… > 5. why do we think that updating `grub2-i386-pc` would have any effect on > this > UEFI machine? Because we cannot get rid of grub2-i386-pc in efi system due to grub2 has historically requires it, not grub2-x86_64-efi ... > 6. how would a failed modification of an UEFI variable, in an otherwise > "unchanged" > boot setup, lead to a 'grub>' prompt? It is possible that shim fallback was triggered as a consequence of incomplete efi boot entry update, after that the missing boot entry were recovered. To my knowledge shim would pick up random entry hereafter from the list it has recovered, and by a good chance that may fail if it did not sanitize unused boot directories. The speculation is mostly stemming from this statemnt in bug report: "To work around the boot failure I was able to manually tell the Dell (A21) UEFI bootloader to boot from a different EFI entry." @David: Would you please again provide more detail in your procedure, especially which boot entry, you use to recover the system. Also please provide these outputs. 1. efibootmgr -vvv 2. find /boot/efi 3. lsblk -f > Are there any error messages from grub before the prompt? > > And 6) is the most pressing issue reported here, IMHO. > AFAICT, something must have gone wrong in the > `update-bootloader --refresh` (AKA `grub2-mkconfig`) area, as opposed to > `update-bootloader --reinit` (AKA `grub2-install`). > > IOW, > 7. is the contents of `/boot/grub2/grub.cfg` plausible? > Same for `/boot/efi/efi/openSUSE/grub.cfg`? @David, Would you please provide these files to inspect ? 1. /boot/grub2/grub.cfg 2. /boot/efi/efi/openSUSE/grub.cfg # Note the 'efi' may be in uppercase. Thanks. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1180741] Images and packages for port ZSystems can not be built because of missing libisl.so.22()(64bit) for gcc10
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 11 Jan '21

11 Jan '21

https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180741 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180741#c2 Dominique Leuenberger <dimstar(a)opensuse.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |IN_PROGRESS --- Comment #2 from Dominique Leuenberger <dimstar(a)opensuse.org> --- Ineed; work is already in progress (before I even saw the bug report); libisl was updated from .so.22 to .so.23; once the package was built, GCC turned out uninstallable. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1178080] systemd-resolved linked against gnutls
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 11 Jan '21

11 Jan '21

https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1178080 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1178080#c3 Franck Bui <fbui(a)suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|IN_PROGRESS |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX --- Comment #3 from Franck Bui <fbui(a)suse.com> --- After discussing this with Ludwig privately, I would prefer switching to openssl once it will be more widely used and when it will offer the same level of functionalities as gnutls does. Hope that makes sense. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1176045] New: VUL-0: jenkins: Jenkins Security Advisory 2020-09-01
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 11 Jan '21

11 Jan '21

https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1176045 Bug ID: 1176045 Summary: VUL-0: jenkins: Jenkins Security Advisory 2020-09-01 Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE.org Version: unspecified Hardware: Other OS: Other Status: NEW Severity: Normal Priority: P5 - None Component: 3rd party software Assignee: screening-team-bugs(a)suse.de Reporter: abergmann(a)suse.com QA Contact: screening-team-bugs(a)suse.de Found By: --- Blocker: --- Affecting: openSUSE:infrastructure/jenkins Jenkins Security Advisory 2020-09-01 CVEs SECURITY-1884 / CVE-2020-2238 SECURITY-1625 / CVE-2020-2239 SECURITY-1023 / CVE-2020-2240 SECURITY-1024 / CVE-2020-2241 (CSRF), CVE-2020-2242 (permission check) SECURITY-1936 / CVE-2020-2243 SECURITY-1770 / CVE-2020-2244 SECURITY-1829 / CVE-2020-2245 SECURITY-1830 / CVE-2020-2246 SECURITY-1831 / CVE-2020-2247 SECURITY-1905 / CVE-2020-2248 SECURITY-1506 / CVE-2020-2249 SECURITY-1631 (1) / CVE-2020-2250 SECURITY-1631 (2) / CVE-2020-2251 Severity SECURITY-1023: High SECURITY-1024: Medium SECURITY-1506: Low SECURITY-1625: Low SECURITY-1631 (1): Medium SECURITY-1631 (2): Medium SECURITY-1770: High SECURITY-1829: High SECURITY-1830: High SECURITY-1831: High SECURITY-1884: High SECURITY-1905: High SECURITY-1936: High -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 3

[Bug 1180741] Images and packages for port ZSystems can not be built because of missing libisl.so.22()(64bit) for gcc10
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 11 Jan '21

11 Jan '21

https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180741 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180741#c1 Marcus Meissner <meissner(a)suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|screening-team-bugs(a)suse.de |dimstar(a)opensuse.org --- Comment #1 from Marcus Meissner <meissner(a)suse.com> --- probably boot strap issue -> dominique -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 957472] python-protobuf not in Leap, formally in 13.1 and 13.2
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 11 Jan '21

11 Jan '21

https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=957472 Maintenance Robot <maint-coord+maintenance_robot(a)suse.de> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Whiteboard|ibs:running:3520:low | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1180380] Blank external monitor after resume from suspend
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 10 Jan '21

10 Jan '21

http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1180380 http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1180380#c10 --- Comment #10 from Russell Sandish <hpcoder(a)hpcoders.com.au> --- Oh, and BTW - I think I've had this problem with OpenSUSE Leap since way back. My one Leap machine I have here I always do a full reboot, never suspend and resume, since it doesn't work. I always assumed it was an ACPI issue, that would be fixed when migrating to newer hardware. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1180380] Blank external monitor after resume from suspend
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 10 Jan '21

10 Jan '21

http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1180380 http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1180380#c9 Russell Sandish <hpcoder(a)hpcoders.com.au> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |hpcoder(a)hpcoders.com.au --- Comment #9 from Russell Sandish <hpcoder(a)hpcoders.com.au> --- I've got this problem with OpenSUSE Tumbleweed after a recent dup. Version 20210107 fails to resume correctly after a suspend (monitor is blank, but can log in via ssh). Works correctly with version 20201209. For some reason, the Windows system seems to have switch to Gnome - this may be the problem: Was: zen>ps -ef|grep dm root 611 1 0 Jan06 ? 00:00:00 /usr/sbin/rpc.idmapd root 1455 1 0 Jan06 ? 00:00:00 /usr/bin/sddm root 1457 1455 0 Jan06 tty7 00:49:27 /usr/bin/Xorg.bin -nolisten tcp -auth /run/sddm/{165cb406-6b48-4b18-8d01-486816598429} -background none -noreset -displayfd 17 -seat seat0 vt7 root 1685 1455 0 Jan06 ? 00:00:00 /usr/libexec/sddm/sddm-helper --socket /tmp/sddm-authd9cad494-ec18-4ba3-9777-b649684f65d4 --id 1 --start fvwm --user rks Now: rusnuc>ps -ef|grep dm root 820 1 0 10:42 ? 00:00:00 /usr/sbin/gdm root 2907 820 0 10:43 ? 00:00:00 gdm-session-worker [pam/gdm-password] rks 2927 2907 0 10:43 tty2 00:00:00 /usr/libexec/gdm/gdm-x-session --register-session --run-script fvwm rks 2929 2927 0 10:43 tty2 00:00:00 /usr/bin/Xorg.bin vt2 -displayfd 3 -auth /run/user/1000/gdm/Xauthority -nolisten tcp -background none -noreset -keeptty -novtswitch -verbose 3 When I get a spare day or so, I might try a complete reinstall from scratch, and make sure that KDM is selected as my windowing system (I actually use neither KDM or Gnome, but usually selected KDM as it was the default in the past). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1177658] New: libdlm: libdlm package should keep the same version with libdlm3 package
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 10 Jan '21

10 Jan '21

https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1177658 Bug ID: 1177658 Summary: libdlm: libdlm package should keep the same version with libdlm3 package Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE Tumbleweed Version: Current Hardware: Other OS: Other Status: NEW Severity: Normal Priority: P5 - None Component: High Availability Assignee: ha-bugs(a)suse.de Reporter: ghe(a)suse.com QA Contact: qa-bugs(a)suse.de Found By: --- Blocker: --- libdlm package should keep the same version with libdlm3 package. As you know, in libdlm project, which creates three packages(libdlm, libdlm3 and libdlm-devel). These three package should always keep the same version to avoid the potential risk. For libdlm-devel package, ther is a "requires=%version" for libdlm3, it is OK. But, for libdlm package, there is not a "requires" for libdlm3 to keep the same version. we should add a "require" too, it is useful when the users upgrade libdlm package. The main user cases, when the user upgrades lvm-lockd/ocfs2-tools packages, this will probably ask libdlm to upgrade too, libdlm3 should be upgraded accordingly. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 6

[Bug 1150462] VUL-1: CVE-2019-16249: opencv: out-of-bounds read in hal_baseline:v_load in core/hal/intrin_sse.hpp when called from computeSSDMeanNorm in modules/video/src/dis_flow.cpp
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 10 Jan '21

10 Jan '21

https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150462 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150462#c3 Stefan Br�ns <stefan.bruens(a)rwth-aachen.de> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #3 from Stefan Br�ns <stefan.bruens(a)rwth-aachen.de> --- TW has openCV 4.5.1 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0