Re: grub2-install
Thank for the feedback, Thus, I am going to summarize the situation. I updated a fedora 38 installation to 40 (on sdc3) as I used to do. But this installation is now not visible from the grub bot menu. I run grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub2/grub.cfg again, and again from both installation (40 and 38 on sda4). The output seems OK (Fedora 40 found from fedora 38, and fedora 38 found from fedora 40). os-prober OK cf /dev/sdc3:Fedora Linux 40 (Forty):Fedora1:linux (from fedora 38) The only way to start fedora 40 is to boot from super grub2 If I understand UEFI does not see the fedora 40 installation It looks that the information from grub2-mkconfig are never made available to the grub boot > -- > ___ > users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org > Do not reply to spam, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue > -- ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Please stop hijacking /etc/resolv.conf
Tim via users writes: Tim: >> Is Anaconda more than just the OS installer, now? Is it needed post- >> install? Kevin Fenzi: > No, it's not needed. It's somewhat of a historical artifact of the way > some installs work that it's there. There was some talk about it > removing itself at the end, but I am not sure where that ended up. I used to remove it, wasn't sure whether I could still do that. dnf remove systemd-resolved also removed it, without any issues. pgpE88dOAKsF5.pgp Description: PGP signature -- ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Please stop hijacking /etc/resolv.conf
On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 6:42 AM Sam Varshavchik wrote: > > Tim via users writes: > > > Tim: > > >> Is Anaconda more than just the OS installer, now? Is it needed post- > > >> install? > > > > Kevin Fenzi: > > > No, it's not needed. It's somewhat of a historical artifact of the way > > > some installs work that it's there. There was some talk about it > > > removing itself at the end, but I am not sure where that ended up. > > > > I used to remove it, wasn't sure whether I could still do that. > > dnf remove systemd-resolved also removed it, without any issues. Didn't a simple removal cause the problems you are encountering? -- ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: grub2-install
I wish to add that efibootmgr does not list the sdc3 installation. > Subject: Re: grub2-install > > Thank for the feedback, > > Thus, I am going to summarize the situation. > I updated a fedora 38 installation to 40 (on sdc3) as I used to do. > But this installation is now not visible from the grub bot menu. > I run grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub2/grub.cfg > again, and again from both installation (40 and 38 on sda4). > > The output seems OK (Fedora 40 found from fedora 38, and fedora 38 found > from fedora 40). > os-prober OK > cf > /dev/sdc3:Fedora Linux 40 (Forty):Fedora1:linux (from fedora 38) > > The only way to start fedora 40 is to boot from super grub2 > If I understand UEFI does not see the fedora 40 installation > > It looks that the information from > grub2-mkconfig > are never made available to the grub boot > > > -- > > ___ > > users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org > > To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > > Fedora Code of Conduct: > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > > List Archives: > > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org > > Do not reply to spam, report it: > > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue > > > -- > ___ > users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org > Do not reply to spam, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue > -- ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: grub2-install
On Mon, 2024-06-03 at 13:53 +0200, Patrick Dupre via users wrote: > I wish to add that efibootmgr does not list the sdc3 installation. By default, it'll only show the boot options that installations have entered into it. If your install didn't do that, you can add entries, yourself. Have a look at the man file for efibootmgr (or other documentation). If you're not sure what you have to do, post back what you think you might have to do, to consult with people here. I can't tell from your posts in this thread whether you're trying to use a UEFI or BIOS system, or shoehorning one install type into the other system. -- uname -rsvp Linux 3.10.0-1160.118.1.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Wed Apr 24 16:01:50 UTC 2024 x86_64 Boilerplate: All unexpected mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted. I will only get to see the messages that are posted to the mailing list. -- ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: grub2-install
On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 3:11 AM Patrick Dupre via users wrote: > I updated a fedora 38 installation to 40 (on sdc3) as I used to do. > But this installation is now not visible from the grub bot menu. > I run grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub2/grub.cfg > again, and again from both installation (40 and 38 on sda4). > > The output seems OK (Fedora 40 found from fedora 38, and fedora 38 found > from fedora 40). > os-prober OK > cf > /dev/sdc3:Fedora Linux 40 (Forty):Fedora1:linux (from fedora 38) > > The only way to start fedora 40 is to boot from super grub2 > If I understand UEFI does not see the fedora 40 installation > > It looks that the information from > grub2-mkconfig > are never made available to the grub boot I ran into something similar installing Fedora 39 under KVM. To make it work I had to make sure the VM was configured for UEFI. I did not pursue trying to get to boot as BIOS. -- ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: grub2-install
Hello, With your message we lost the thread. The Fedora 38 is installed on sda4 with /boot/efi on sda3 (fat16 EFI System Partition) The fedora 40 is installed on sdc3 I only have /boot installed on sdc2 I guess that I could run something like grub-install /dev/sda --target=x86_64-efi --efi-directory=/boot/efi/ but this provide an error as indicated in my previous message. sda1 is BIOS boot partition grub2 core.img (I cannot mount it) efibootmgr -v BootCurrent: Timeout: 1 seconds BootOrder: ,0006,0004,0005,0002,0001 Boot* fedora HD(3,GPT,01dd38df-fda0-487b-add4-1fca3aecf167,0x2001800,0xfa000)/\EFI\FEDORA\GRUBX64.EFI Boot0006* Fedora HD(3,GPT,01dd38df-fda0-487b-add4-1fca3aecf167,0x2001800,0xfa000)/\EFI\FEDORA\SHIM.EFI424f 0005, 0002, 0001 are hardware Running grub-customizer I get (from fedora 38) "Could not import accounts from legacy client configuration initializing (w/o specified bootloader type)… * reading partition info… * Loading Framebuffer resolutions (background process) * Finding out if this is a live CD sh: line 1: hwinfo: command not found *** initializing (w/ specified bootloader type)… * Checking if the config directory is clean *** loading configuration *** loading - preserveConfig: no * unsetting saved config *** loading settings *** loading grub list * loading scripts… * loading proxies… * cleaning up proxy configuration… * creating proxifiedScript links & chmodding other files… * running grub2-mkconfig Error getting object manager client: Error calling StartServiceByName for com.nextcloudgmbh.Nextcloud: Timeout was reachedError getting object manager client: Error calling StartServiceByName for com.nextcloudgmbh.Nextcloud: Timeout was reached * restoring grub configuration * removing invalid proxies from list exception '28InvalidStringFormatException' with message 'unable to parse index from ' in /builddir/build/BUILD/grub-customizer-5.2.3/src/main/../Bootstrap/../Model/Script.hpp:308 * loading completed *** grub list completely loaded *** loading saved grub list I do not understand all the fedora 36 that I never use (no fedora 38 or fedora 40) They also show at the grub boot ! Should I do something like efibootmgr --create --disk=/dev/sdc --part=3 --label="fedora 40" --loader=/boot/efi/EFI/fedora/shimx64.efi ? Do I need to do something from Fedora 40 (right now only bootable from supergrub2 USB key)? > > On Mon, 2024-06-03 at 13:53 +0200, Patrick Dupre via users wrote: > > I wish to add that efibootmgr does not list the sdc3 installation. > > By default, it'll only show the boot options that installations have > entered into it. If your install didn't do that, you can add entries, > yourself. > > Have a look at the man file for efibootmgr (or other documentation). > If you're not sure what you have to do, post back what you think you > might have to do, to consult with people here. > > I can't tell from your posts in this thread whether you're trying to > use a UEFI or BIOS system, or shoehorning one install type into the > other system. > > -- > > uname -rsvp > Linux 3.10.0-1160.118.1.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Wed Apr 24 16:01:50 UTC 2024 x86_64 > > Boilerplate: All unexpected mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted. > I will only get to see the messages that are posted to the mailing list. > > > On Mon, 2024-06-03 at 13:53 +0200, Patrick Dupre via users wrote: > > I wish to add that efibootmgr does not list the sdc3 installation. > > By default, it'll only show the boot options that installations have > entered into it. If your install didn't do that, you can add entries, > yourself. > > Have a look at the man file for efibootmgr (or other documentation). > If you're not sure what you have to do, post back what you think you > might have to do, to consult with people here. > > I can't tell from your posts in this thread whether you're trying to > use a UEFI or BIOS system, or shoehorning one install type into the > other system. > > -- > > uname -rsvp > Linux 3.10.0-1160.118.1.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Wed Apr 24 16:01:50 UTC 2024 x86_64 > > Boilerplate: All unexpected mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted. > I will only get to see the messages that are posted to the mailing list. > > > -- ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Installed Rawhide with btrfs; dnf system update to v40 has errors ; re-install from Live USB without affecting a non-root subvolume?
People, A while ago I was in a hurry to start using F40 (Sway) and installed Rawhide from a live usb to get started. Everything went pretty well and I had minimal problems up until after f40 was release. However now, when I tried to do a: dnf system upgrade download --releasever=40 I get a lot of errors - trying to do "dnf --erase" the problem rpms ends up making the problem worse. So, if I try to reinstall from the current f40 live usb - can I do that without touching the backup subvolume? ie: /dev/nvme0n1p3btrfs 1,951,850,496 464,659,184 1,486,438,224 24% / /dev/nvme0n1p3btrfs 1,951,850,496 464,659,184 1,486,438,224 24% /backup For decades I have just been using a separate partition for /home with ext[2|3|4] and this was conveniently not touched if I did a custom install to upgrade - I want to do something similar for this backup subvolume. Thanks, Phil. -- Philip Rhoades PO Box 896 Cowra NSW 2794 Australia E-mail: p...@pricom.com.au -- ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Installed Rawhide with btrfs; dnf system update to v40 has errors ; re-install from Live USB without affecting a non-root subvolume?
On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 4:43 PM Philip Rhoades via users < users@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote: > People, > > A while ago I was in a hurry to start using F40 (Sway) and installed > Rawhide from a live usb to get started. > > Everything went pretty well and I had minimal problems up until after > f40 was release. However now, when I tried to do a: > >dnf system upgrade download --releasever=40 > > I get a lot of errors - trying to do "dnf --erase" the problem rpms ends > up making the problem worse. > You need to tell us what errors you encounter. Are they filesystem problems, package conflicts, etc.? > > So, if I try to reinstall from the current f40 live usb - can I do that > without touching the backup subvolume? ie: > > /dev/nvme0n1p3btrfs 1,951,850,496 464,659,184 1,486,438,224 > 24% / > /dev/nvme0n1p3btrfs 1,951,850,496 464,659,184 1,486,438,224 > 24% /backup > > Unlike earlier filesystems, btrfs doesn't silently ignore bitrot. Corrupt btrfs filesystems are often a result of hardware faults. For decades I have just been using a separate partition for /home with > ext[2|3|4] and this was conveniently not touched if I did a custom > install to upgrade - I want to do something similar for this backup > subvolume. > I would never consider a btrfs subvolume a suitable location for a backup. The btrfs snapshots provide a way to go back in time after data are lost due to a software glitch or command-line typo. Using a subvolume, when the drive fails, both the original and backups may be lost. If a drive is close to failure, a linux install often pushes it over the edge (due to amount of activity), so I like to make sure backups are good before an upgrade or install. -- George N. White III -- ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Installed Rawhide with btrfs; dnf system update to v40 has errors ; re-install from Live USB without affecting a non-root subvolume?
George, On 2024-06-04 09:37, George N. White III wrote: On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 4:43 PM Philip Rhoades via users wrote: People, A while ago I was in a hurry to start using F40 (Sway) and installed Rawhide from a live usb to get started. Everything went pretty well and I had minimal problems up until after f40 was release. However now, when I tried to do a: dnf system upgrade download --releasever=40 I get a lot of errors - trying to do "dnf --erase" the problem rpms ends up making the problem worse. You need to tell us what errors you encounter. Are they filesystem problems, package conflicts, etc.? I think it will be too much to sort out the errors . . So, if I try to reinstall from the current f40 live usb - can I do that without touching the backup subvolume? ie: /dev/nvme0n1p3btrfs 1,951,850,496 464,659,184 1,486,438,224 24% / /dev/nvme0n1p3btrfs 1,951,850,496 464,659,184 1,486,438,224 24% /backup Unlike earlier filesystems, btrfs doesn't silently ignore bitrot. Corrupt btrfs filesystems are often a result of hardware faults. Hmm . . not good . . this is a new card at least . . For decades I have just been using a separate partition for /home with ext[2|3|4] and this was conveniently not touched if I did a custom install to upgrade - I want to do something similar for this backup subvolume. I would never consider a btrfs subvolume a suitable location for a backup. The btrfs snapshots provide a way to go back in time after data are lost due to a software glitch or command-line typo. Using a subvolume, when the drive fails, both the original and backups may be lost. If a drive is close to failure, a linux install often pushes it over the edge (due to amount of activity), so I like to make sure backups are good before an upgrade or install. OK - things to think about (thanks for that!) - but my immediate question has not been answered - is it actually possible to re-install from a Live-USB while preserving what is in the /backup subvolume - like I used to do with the ext4 /home partition or will the zubvolume get zapped? Thanks, Phil. -- Philip Rhoades PO Box 896 Cowra NSW 2794 Australia E-mail: p...@pricom.com.au -- ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Please stop hijacking /etc/resolv.conf
Jeffrey Walton writes: On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 6:42 AM Sam Varshavchik wrote: > > Tim via users writes: > > > Tim: > > >> Is Anaconda more than just the OS installer, now? Is it needed post- > > >> install? > > > > Kevin Fenzi: > > > No, it's not needed. It's somewhat of a historical artifact of the way > > > some installs work that it's there. There was some talk about it > > > removing itself at the end, but I am not sure where that ended up. > > > > I used to remove it, wasn't sure whether I could still do that. > > dnf remove systemd-resolved also removed it, without any issues. Didn't a simple removal cause the problems you are encountering? Nope, quite the opposite: it was a simple addition. A dnf system-upgrade pulled in anaconda. Which pulled in system-resolved. Which overwrote /etc/resolv.conf Uninstalling the whole mess actually mostly restored the symlink back to NetworkManager. Except that it was no-stub-resolv.conf originally. Which has the wrong selinux context, in F40. So, we're not out of the woods, just yet… pgp1cM3bybfMB.pgp Description: PGP signature -- ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
