Processed: Re: Bug#1075713: linux: ISO missing qxl.ko.xz kernel module

2024-07-03 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: > reassign -1 src:debian-installer Bug #1075713 [linux] linux: D-I's X fails to start under kvm -vga qxl Bug reassigned from package 'linux' to 'src:debian-installer'. No longer marked as found in versions 6.9.7-1. Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #10757

Re: Bug#1075713: linux: ISO missing qxl.ko.xz kernel module

2024-07-03 Thread Salvatore Bonaccorso
Control: reassign -1 src:debian-installer Hi Cyril, On Wed, Jul 03, 2024 at 11:34:30PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > Hi, > > Tj (2024-07-03): > > Source: linux > > Followup-For: Bug #1075713 > > X-Debbugs-Cc: tj.iam...@proton.me debian-boot@lists.debian.org > > > > I've inspected the arch-la

Re: Bug#1075713: linux: ISO missing qxl.ko.xz kernel module

2024-07-03 Thread Cyril Brulebois
Hi, Tj (2024-07-03): > Source: linux > Followup-For: Bug #1075713 > X-Debbugs-Cc: tj.iam...@proton.me debian-boot@lists.debian.org > > I've inspected the arch-latest amd64 ISO from: > > https://get.debian.org/images/daily-builds/daily/arch-latest/amd64/iso-cd/debian-testing-amd64-netinst.iso >

Bug#1075713: linux: ISO missing qxl.ko.xz kernel module

2024-07-03 Thread Tj
Source: linux Followup-For: Bug #1075713 X-Debbugs-Cc: tj.iam...@proton.me debian-boot@lists.debian.org I've inspected the arch-latest amd64 ISO from: https://get.debian.org/images/daily-builds/daily/arch-latest/amd64/iso-cd/debian-testing-amd64-netinst.iso It is missing drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl.

Re: SBAT revocation. Do we need a 12.6.1 release? (Was: Heads-up: Verifying shim SBAT data failed: Security Policy Violation)

2024-07-03 Thread Steve McIntyre
On Wed, Jul 03, 2024 at 10:45:10PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote: >Steve McIntyre (2024-07-03): >> There are other alternative on your test systems: > >ACK, ta. > >> 1. disable secure boot while testing (which of course is *not* the >> right answer long-term!) > >That's BIOS-based tests for me

Re: SBAT revocation. Do we need a 12.6.1 release? (Was: Heads-up: Verifying shim SBAT data failed: Security Policy Violation)

2024-07-03 Thread Cyril Brulebois
Steve McIntyre (2024-07-03): > There are other alternative on your test systems: ACK, ta. > 1. disable secure boot while testing (which of course is *not* the > right answer long-term!) That's BIOS-based tests for me. > 2. use mokutil --set-sbat-policy from a running system to go back to

Re: SBAT revocation. Do we need a 12.6.1 release? (Was: Heads-up: Verifying shim SBAT data failed: Security Policy Violation)

2024-07-03 Thread Steve McIntyre
Answering the specific question here... On Wed, Jul 03, 2024 at 06:21:27PM +0200, Roland Clobus wrote: > >To reproduce: >* Use the stock OVMF_VARS_4M.ms.fd >* Boot with the live 12.6.0 bookworm image (I used 'standard') [1] or the >netinst image [2] >* mokutil --list-sbat-revocations shows: >sbat,

Re: SBAT revocation. Do we need a 12.6.1 release? (Was: Heads-up: Verifying shim SBAT data failed: Security Policy Violation)

2024-07-03 Thread Steve McIntyre
On Wed, Jul 03, 2024 at 06:31:39PM +0200, Roland Clobus wrote: >On 03/07/2024 18:21, Roland Clobus wrote: >> Thanks! That did the trick, it shows one offending entry, which causes >> this issue: grub,3 (see screenshot) > >Oops. Actually, it is shim which causes the issue, as the screenshot shows >t

Re: SBAT revocation. Do we need a 12.6.1 release? (Was: Heads-up: Verifying shim SBAT data failed: Security Policy Violation)

2024-07-03 Thread Roland Clobus
On 03/07/2024 18:21, Roland Clobus wrote: Thanks! That did the trick, it shows one offending entry, which causes this issue: grub,3 (see screenshot) Oops. Actually, it is shim which causes the issue, as the screenshot shows that shim has version 3, and at least version 4 is required. OpenP

Bug#1075714: (no subject)

2024-07-03 Thread Steven Maddox
Small omission... "This reallypromoting the adoption of IPv6!" ^isn't :) Unless of course I've got this completely wrong and there is a way to do both a static IPv4 and a static IPv6 completely through d-i before the system even reboots into Debian for the first time. B

Re: SBAT revocation. Do we need a 12.6.1 release? (Was: Heads-up: Verifying shim SBAT data failed: Security Policy Violation)

2024-07-03 Thread Roland Clobus
Hello list, On 03/07/2024 08:38, Pascal Hambourg wrote: On 03/07/2024 at 08:13, Roland Clobus wrote: Who can find out which part in this file is causing the issue? Or which tools do I need to use to debug this? Maybe increase shim verbosity with # mokutil --set-verbosity true Thanks! Tha

Bug#1075714: Can't statically configure both IPv4 and IPv6 using d-i

2024-07-03 Thread Steven Maddox
Package: debian-installer There appears to be no way (when using the Debian Installer) to specify *both* a static IPv4 address (along with netmask and gateway) and a static IPv6 address (along with netmask and gateway). It would be nice if when you pick 'Configure network manually' that it a

Re: Planning for 12.7/11.11

2024-07-03 Thread Mark Hymers
On Thu, 20, Jun, 2024 at 10:35:35PM +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire spoke thus.. > - Saturday 31st August: it's later than ideal, leaving a gap before LTS >starts work, but that may be unavoidable. I can currently do 31st August. Mark -- Mark Hymers signature.asc Description: PGP signature