October 2021 - openSUSE Bugs - openSUSE Mailing Lists

[Bug 1191260] kernel 5.14.8 post scriptlets failing
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 05 Oct '21

05 Oct '21

https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1191260 Jiri Slaby <jslaby(a)suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jslaby(a)suse.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1190918] New: [Staging:A.270.1] openQA test fails in journal_check (audit hardening)
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 05 Oct '21

05 Oct '21

http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1190918 Bug ID: 1190918 Summary: [Staging:A.270.1] openQA test fails in journal_check (audit hardening) Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE Distribution Version: Leap 15.4 Hardware: Other URL: https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/1937572/modules/jour nal_check/steps/22 OS: Other Status: NEW Severity: Normal Priority: P5 - None Component: Basesystem Assignee: screening-team-bugs(a)suse.de Reporter: dimstar(a)opensuse.org QA Contact: qa-bugs(a)suse.de Found By: openQA Blocker: Yes ## Observation openQA test in scenario microos-Staging:A-Staging-DVD-x86_64-container-host-microos@64bit-2G-HD40G fails in [journal_check](https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/1937572/modules/journal_ch… Sep 25 18:42:45.201774 localhost systemd[610]: Failed to mount /run/systemd/unit-root/etc/audit to /run/systemd/unit-root/etc/audit: Permission denied ## Test suite description ## Reproducible Fails since (at least) Build [A.270.1](https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/1936261) ## Expected result Last good: [A.267.2](https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/1936009) (or more recent) ## Further details Always latest result in this scenario: [latest](https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/latest?arch=x86_64&distri=microos… -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 11

[Bug 1191322] Optimize building initrd when updating system
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 05 Oct '21

05 Oct '21

https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1191322 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1191322#c3 Martin Wilck <martin.wilck(a)suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |IN_PROGRESS --- Comment #3 from Martin Wilck <martin.wilck(a)suse.com> --- (In reply to Takashi Iwai from comment #1) > There has been already discussions and some ongoing works about the > optimization of initrd creation. Indeed. We have an open feature request for SLE, and I'm actively working on this topic for the upcoming SUSE labs conference. There are plenty of ways to optimize this, and dare say I've explored most of them. We still have some way to go until all of this is properly tested and ready for release. (In reply to Michal Suchanek from comment #2) > posttrans is broken - it only runs on install, not on uninstall. > > When uninstalling the ramdisk has to be rebuilt right away. It's true in principle, but we'll be able to deal with this restriction. We shouldn't rebuild the initrd *at all* when we remove a kernel subpackage like kernel-default-extra. We currently don't anyway, because of bug 1191200, and haven't been doing it for more than a decade, without anyone complaining. In the vast majority of cases, when a kernel subpackage is removed, the corresponding base package is removed as well (because it happens in the course of a kernel update or purge-kernels run). Rebuilding the initrd for a kernel that's going to be removed a few seconds later is obviously a waste of time. In the remaining cases, someone may have installed kernel-default-extra or some other subpackage, realizes that he doesn't need/want it any more, and uninstalls it. He wouldn't do this if the kernel-default-extra contained any modules that were essential for his system to boot. And even if there were any (some crypto modules from -extra tend to be added to the initrd always), what harm would be done if they remain in the initrd while the package they belong to has been removed? The only reason to do that would be some abstract "correctness". But in practice, this doesn't justify to waste the users's time by rebuilding the initrd in the common case, when it's absolutely pointless. It's true that when the %preun or %postun scripts of a kernel subpackage is run, we have no way to determine whether or not the base package is going to be removed. AFAICT it's not possible to retrieve this information without changes in rpm, libzypp, or both. Therefore we have to make a guess, and we should guess that the base package will be removed, because it's the common case, and because we can't do harm if we guess wrong. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1186127] selinux-ready error
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 05 Oct '21

05 Oct '21

https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1186127 Thorsten Kukuk <kukuk(a)suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |kukuk(a)suse.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1191260] kernel 5.14.8 post scriptlets failing
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 05 Oct '21

05 Oct '21

https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1191260 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1191260#c16 --- Comment #16 from Martin Wilck <martin.wilck(a)suse.com> --- > So is_supported is completely redundant. It isn't, and I told you why. You don't buy it, and I didn't expect you would. No point in continuing this debate, we both have far more important things to do. I hope we agree at least that the current code, with or without early exit, is far better readable and maintainable than anything we had during the years when the scriptlets were embedded in the rpm. If there's a real bug, show me. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1102840] New: trackerbug: build fails at some time
by bugzilla_noreply＠novell.com 05 Oct '21

05 Oct '21

http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1102840 Bug ID: 1102840 Summary: trackerbug: build fails at some time Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE Tumbleweed Version: Current Hardware: Other OS: openSUSE Factory Status: CONFIRMED Severity: Normal Priority: P5 - None Component: Development Assignee: bwiedemann(a)suse.com Reporter: bwiedemann(a)suse.com QA Contact: qa-bugs(a)suse.de Depends on: 1081871, 1031548, 1031549, 1068372 Found By: Development Blocker: --- Some packages make assumptions about the date+time they are built e.g. assuming that cookies or SSL-certs in their unittests are not yet expired but that breaks building in the future. This can cause trouble for maintenance-updates later and it makes my reproducible builds efforts harder. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 3

[Bug 1190801] No sound after bootup on 15.3
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 05 Oct '21

05 Oct '21

https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1190801 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1190801#c16 --- Comment #16 from Takashi Iwai <tiwai(a)suse.com> --- Thanks. Again a new kernel is being built in the same OBS home:tiwai:bsc1190801 repo. The new kernel will have 5.3.18-*.g2c72f4d version. If this is confirmed to work, I'll submit the patch to upstream and backport to openSUSE kernels. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1191338] New: libc: y2038 bug in 32-bit
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 05 Oct '21

05 Oct '21

http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1191338 Bug ID: 1191338 Summary: libc: y2038 bug in 32-bit Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE Tumbleweed Version: Current Hardware: Other OS: Other Status: NEW Severity: Normal Priority: P5 - None Component: Basesystem Assignee: screening-team-bugs(a)suse.de Reporter: richard.palethorpe(a)suse.com QA Contact: qa-bugs(a)suse.de Found By: --- Blocker: --- Because the kernel has started moving to y2038 safe time values it is causing some regressions in tests e.g. https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/1952348#step/cve-2021-26708/8 Because in 32-bit compat mode it is passing time values which are too small. In theory this is a kernel regression. However practically speaking it is more important to only use 64-bit time values in user land. Indeed the plan is to disable 32-bit time values in the 2030s (https://lwn.net/Articles/643407/) AFAICT the solution is to set __TIMESIZE == 64 when building glibc. https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node/64_002dbit-time-symbol-h… Then time values become 64-bit even in 32-bit mode. This change will require all 32bit packages which link against libc to be recompiled. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1186127] selinux-ready error
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 05 Oct '21

05 Oct '21

https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1186127 Gayane Osipyan <gayane.osipyan(a)suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- URL| |https://jira.suse.com/brows | |e/CSD-91 CC| |gayane.osipyan(a)suse.com Assignee|kubic-bugs(a)opensuse.org |gayane.osipyan(a)suse.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1188077] Dbus broken on a fresh install if SElinux enabled
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 05 Oct '21

05 Oct '21

https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1188077 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1188077#c4 Johannes Segitz <jsegitz(a)suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE --- Comment #4 from Johannes Segitz <jsegitz(a)suse.com> --- It doesn't have support. This was introduced by accident and needs to be removed from the installation options. I'll mark it as a duplicate of 1187326 since we need to get this out of yast *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1187326 *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0