June 2024 - openSUSE Bugs - openSUSE Mailing Lists

[Bug 1225893] New: [tw][Build 20240531] Sysctl 'Sysctl_net_core_optmem_max' value is changed
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 04 Jun '24

04 Jun '24

https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1225893 Bug ID: 1225893 Summary: [tw][Build 20240531] Sysctl 'Sysctl_net_core_optmem_max' value is changed Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE Tumbleweed Version: Current Hardware: x86-64 URL: https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/4241601/modules/Sysc tl/steps/194 OS: Other Status: NEW Severity: Normal Priority: P5 - None Component: Kernel Assignee: kernel-bugs(a)opensuse.org Reporter: richard.fan(a)suse.com QA Contact: qa-bugs(a)suse.de Target Milestone: --- Found By: openQA Blocker: Yes Created attachment 875292 --> https://bugzilla.suse.com/attachment.cgi?id=875292&action=edit openQA test result ## Description I can see below error message when testing sysctl on tw: ># Test messages # Sysctl_net_core_optmem_max ># failure: >expected: 20480 >returned: 131072 >invalid value: '131072', expected '20480' The same test passed 3 months ago, see https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/4008446 Can you please confirm it is a product bug or by design? thanks ## Observation openQA test in scenario opensuse-Tumbleweed-DVD-x86_64-sys-param-check@64bit fails in [Sysctl](https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/4241601/modules/Sysctl/steps/194) ## Test suite description RAM size is set to 2048, some kernel parameters change with total RAM https://github.com/openSUSE/sys-param-check ## Reproducible Fails since (at least) Build [20230910](https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/3565003) ## Expected result Last good: [20230908](https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/3562695) (or more recent) ## Further details Always latest result in this scenario: [latest](https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/latest?arch=x86_64&distri=opensus… -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1223587] windows:mingw:win{32|64}: not present email address hib@hiberis.nl in bug tracker
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 04 Jun '24

04 Jun '24

https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223587 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223587#c3 --- Comment #3 from Fridrich Strba <fstrba(a)suse.com> --- (In reply to Ralf Habacker from comment #2) > This address also needs to be removed from > https://en.opensuse.org/Template:Mingw_new_bug, which is used on the project > page https://en.opensuse.org/Build:projects:windows:mingw:win32 Wow, I did not even remember about the Wiki page. I must be getting really old. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1225891] New: [tw][Build 20240531] sysctl 'Sysctl_fs_inotify_max_user_watches' value is changed
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 04 Jun '24

04 Jun '24

https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1225891 Bug ID: 1225891 Summary: [tw][Build 20240531] sysctl 'Sysctl_fs_inotify_max_user_watches' value is changed Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE Tumbleweed Version: Current Hardware: Other URL: https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/4241601/modules/Sysc tl/steps/31 OS: Other Status: NEW Severity: Normal Priority: P5 - None Component: KDE Applications Assignee: opensuse-kde-bugs(a)opensuse.org Reporter: richard.fan(a)suse.com QA Contact: qa-bugs(a)suse.de Target Milestone: --- Found By: openQA Blocker: Yes Created attachment 875290 --> https://bugzilla.suse.com/attachment.cgi?id=875290&action=edit openqa test reusult ## Description From sysctl test logs, I can see below errors: # Test messages # Sysctl_fs_inotify_max_user_watches # failure: expected: 15070%0.5 returned: 14959 invalid value: '14959', expected '14994:15145' The same test passed 3 months ago, see https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/4008446#step/Sysctl/31 Is it a product bug or by design/feature? ## Observation openQA test in scenario opensuse-Tumbleweed-DVD-x86_64-sys-param-check@64bit fails in [Sysctl](https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/4241601/modules/Sysctl/steps/31) ## Test suite description RAM size is set to 2048, some kernel parameters change with total RAM https://github.com/openSUSE/sys-param-check ## Reproducible Fails since (at least) Build [20230910](https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/3565003) ## Expected result Last good: [20230908](https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/3562695) (or more recent) ## Further details Always latest result in this scenario: [latest](https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/latest?arch=x86_64&distri=opensus… -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 1220403] New: VUL-0: CVE-2024-23837: libhtp: excessive processing time of HTTP headers can lead to denial of service
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 04 Jun '24

04 Jun '24

https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1220403 Bug ID: 1220403 Summary: VUL-0: CVE-2024-23837: libhtp: excessive processing time of HTTP headers can lead to denial of service Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE Distribution Version: Leap 15.6 Hardware: Other URL: https://smash.suse.de/issue/395171/ OS: Other Status: NEW Severity: Normal Priority: P5 - None Component: Security Assignee: otto.hollmann(a)suse.com Reporter: smash_bz(a)suse.de QA Contact: security-team(a)suse.de CC: carlos.lopez(a)suse.com Target Milestone: --- Found By: Security Response Team Blocker: --- LibHTP is a security-aware parser for the HTTP protocol. Crafted traffic can cause excessive processing time of HTTP headers, leading to denial of service. This issue is addressed in 0.5.46. References: http://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/detail?vulnId=CVE-2024-23837 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2024-23837 https://github.com/OISF/libhtp/commit/20ac301d801cdf01b3f021cca08a22a87f477… https://github.com/OISF/libhtp/security/advisories/GHSA-f9wf-rrjj-qx8m https://redmine.openinfosecfoundation.org/issues/6444 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 4

[Bug 1225890] New: [tw][Build 20240531] sysctl kernel parameter 'sysctl: cannot stat /proc/sys/kernel/sched_child_runs_first: No such file or directory'
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 04 Jun '24

04 Jun '24

https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1225890 Bug ID: 1225890 Summary: [tw][Build 20240531] sysctl kernel parameter 'sysctl: cannot stat /proc/sys/kernel/sched_child_runs_first: No such file or directory' Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE Tumbleweed Version: Current Hardware: x86-64 URL: https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/4241601/modules/Sysc tl/steps/135 OS: Other Status: NEW Severity: Normal Priority: P5 - None Component: Kernel Assignee: kernel-bugs(a)opensuse.org Reporter: richard.fan(a)suse.com QA Contact: qa-bugs(a)suse.de Target Milestone: --- Found By: openQA Blocker: Yes ## Description From tw setup, I can see below error on sysctl test: # Test messages # Sysctl_kernel_sched_child_runs_first # failure: 255 - sysctl: cannot stat /proc/sys/kernel/sched_child_runs_first: No such file or directory The issue is not seen on sle15sp6 [the int value is '0'] Is it a new kernel feature or a product bug? ## Observation openQA test in scenario opensuse-Tumbleweed-DVD-x86_64-sys-param-check@64bit fails in [Sysctl](https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/4241601/modules/Sysctl/steps/135) ## Test suite description RAM size is set to 2048, some kernel parameters change with total RAM https://github.com/openSUSE/sys-param-check ## Reproducible Fails since (at least) Build [20230910](https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/3565003) ## Expected result Last good: [20230908](https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/3562695) (or more recent) ## Further details Always latest result in this scenario: [latest](https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/latest?arch=x86_64&distri=opensus… -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 1

[Bug 1223587] New: windows:mingw:win{32|64}: not present email address hib@hiberis.nl in bug tracker
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 04 Jun '24

04 Jun '24

https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223587 Bug ID: 1223587 Summary: windows:mingw:win{32|64}: not present email address hib(a)hiberis.nl in bug tracker Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE.org Version: unspecified Hardware: Other OS: Other Status: NEW Severity: Normal Priority: P5 - None Component: 3rd party software Assignee: fstrba(a)suse.com Reporter: ralf.habacker(a)freenet.de QA Contact: screening-team-bugs(a)suse.de CC: fridrich.strba(a)bluewin.ch, mkbosmans(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Found By: --- Blocker: --- When opening new bugs for the mingw32|64 project, the mentioned email address is entered in the CC field. Submitting the bug then fails with the error message that this email address does not exist. This email address should be removed from the ticket system. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 1

[Bug 1225877] windows:mingw:win{32|64}/mingw{32|64}-gcc
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 04 Jun '24

04 Jun '24

https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1225877 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1225877#c1 Fridrich Strba <fstrba(a)suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|fstrba(a)suse.com |ralf.habacker(a)freenet.de --- Comment #1 from Fridrich Strba <fstrba(a)suse.com> --- Please, Ralf, don't assign me this kind of bugs. I have no time to work on it at all. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1221715] New: GCC 14: liblogging package fails
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 04 Jun '24

04 Jun '24

https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221715 Bug ID: 1221715 Summary: GCC 14: liblogging package fails Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE Tumbleweed Version: Current Hardware: Other OS: Other Status: NEW Severity: Normal Priority: P5 - None Component: Development Assignee: screening-team-bugs(a)suse.de Reporter: michal.jires(a)suse.com QA Contact: qa-bugs(a)suse.de CC: thomas.blume(a)suse.com Blocks: 1220571 Target Milestone: --- Found By: --- Blocker: --- Building liblogging with GCC 14 fails here: https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:Staging:… Due to: beepframe.c:170:1: error: return type defaults to ‘int’ [-Wimplicit-int] 170 | sbFramActualRecvFramCommonBody(sbFramObj* pThis,sbChanObj *pChan) | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ beeplisten.c: In function ‘sbLstnInit’: beeplisten.c:1055:28: error: implicit declaration of function ‘sbSock_InitUXDOMSOCK’ [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] 1055 | if((iRet = sbSock_InitUXDOMSOCK(&(pThis->pSockUXDOMSOCKListening), pActualSockName, /*SOCK_DGRAM*/ SOCK_STREAM)) != SR_RET_OK) | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Builds with: Index: liblogging-1.0.6/rfc3195/src/beepframe.c =================================================================== --- liblogging-1.0.6.orig/rfc3195/src/beepframe.c +++ liblogging-1.0.6/rfc3195/src/beepframe.c @@ -167,6 +167,7 @@ srRetVal sbFramActualRecvFramCommonHdr(s * The channel object is updated, e.g. with a * new seqno. */ +int sbFramActualRecvFramCommonBody(sbFramObj* pThis,sbChanObj *pChan) { unsigned iToRcv; Index: liblogging-1.0.6/rfc3195/src/sockets.h =================================================================== --- liblogging-1.0.6.orig/rfc3195/src/sockets.h +++ liblogging-1.0.6/rfc3195/src/sockets.h @@ -340,4 +340,8 @@ srRetVal sbSockRecvFrom(sbSockObj *pThis # define SOCKET_ERROR -1 #endif +#if FEATURE_UNIX_DOMAIN_SOCKETS == 1 +srRetVal sbSock_InitUXDOMSOCK(sbSockObj **ppThis, char *pszSockName, int iSockType); +#endif + #endif See the meta bug#1220571 for more info. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 531160] osc build breaks other builds ...
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 04 Jun '24

04 Jun '24

https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=531160 Daniel Mach <daniel.mach(a)suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Whiteboard| |not:osc CC| |daniel.mach(a)suse.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1224773] Cannot install NVIDIA drivers in latest Aeon RC2
by bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com 04 Jun '24

04 Jun '24

https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1224773 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1224773#c34 --- Comment #34 from Alberto Planas Dominguez <aplanas(a)suse.com> --- (In reply to Stefan Dirsch from comment #33) > Now I'm wondering why generating initrd works on SLE Micro 6.0. It's also a > transactional system. It doesn't use systemd-boot yet though. The difference when using a bootloader that follows BLS in a EFI systems (sd-boot, grub2-bls) then /boon should be in the ESP, in a FAT32 partition. And is there where the kernel and initrd are stored. But in MicroOS the kernel and initrd from /boot are in the same btrfs filesystem, in a different subvolume, so in can be part of the transaction. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0