Yesterday I tried to use debootstrap to create an Ubuntu 24.04 (Noble
Numbat) chroot from an Ubuntu 20.04 (Focal Fossa) host which failed with
the following error, which is discussed in but not literally quoted in
this bug report:
I: Chosen extractor for .deb packages: dpkg-deb
I: Extracting base-
Public bug reported:
While working on the development of a Python package I created (deb-pkg-
tools) that uses python-apt and refers to its documentation I noticed
that the online documentation seems to have disappeared...
This makes it impossible for my project to cross-reference the python-
apt
For whatever it's worth: I wouldn't mind spending a bit of time trying
to set up https://python-apt.readthedocs.io/ based on the git repository
at https://git.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python-apt, although I can't
tell if this plan will actually work without trying it (for example I
don't know i
It's a shame I can't edit comments on Launchpad: Please disregard my
last comment, I seem to have misread the pbuilder issue, sorry for the
noise. That doesn't change the validity of my point about updating
debootstrap though.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubun
It's a shame I can't edit comments on Launchpad: Please disregard my
previous comment, I seem to have misread the issue, sorry for the noise.
The error message noted in the title of this issue exactly matches the
problem that I ran into last weekend, which explains how this issue
popped up rather
For posterity: I believe this to be a bug in debootstrap that was caused
by an update to the ubuntu-keyring package [1] that received no
corresponding update to the debootstrap 'configuration' files [2].
To summarize:
- This affects Ubuntu <= 12.04 chroots on Ubuntu >= 17.04 hosts.
- The best wor
Going over my notes on this topic I realized that I hadn't pointed out
in my previous message that the issue I've pointed out has already
triggered a workaround (that shouldn't be necessary IMHO) in the
pbuilder project:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pbuilder/+bug/599394
In my opinion
> Precise archive is only signed with the old key. To support using the
precise archive in newer releases, such as with debootstrap, we need to
do the following ...
This comment implied to me that the use of debootstrap to create an
Ubuntu 12.04 chroot on e.g. Ubuntu 18.04 (which includes the ubun
Thanks to everyone involved in getting this fixed!
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1594740
Title:
Supervisor not enabled or started in Ubuntu 16.04 after installation
To manage notifi
Proving that the original issue still exists:
peter@mbp> sudo apt install supervisor
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Suggested packages:
supervisor-doc
The following NEW packages will be installed:
supervisor
0 upgraded, 1 newly i
@nacc:
After installation of the buggy package:
peter@mbp> sha1sum /lib/systemd/system/supervisor.service
88b0121e625b8ffe1cf6b0df3cf555bee8e7d3e9 /lib/systemd/system/supervisor.service
After applying the manual workarounds (just being thorough, of course I
would expect 'systemctl' to just crea
After carefully rereading @nacc's question I realized I missed an
essential detail ("does it end up using the same systemd file"). I
believe this is indeed the case, as intended (I assume?).
Here's what I get after a clean install of the fixed package:
peter@mbp> ls -ld /etc/systemd/system/multi-
@nacc With regards to the other way to answer your question, I've now
also tested the following sequence of events:
1. Purged the supervisor package,
2. removed the PPA `nacc/lp1594740',
3. ran `apt-get update',
4. ensured the symbolic link
/etc/systemd/system/multi-user.target.wants/supervisor.s
@nacc There are two ways to interpret your question :-) and both are
valid inquiries with regards to regression potential, so I'll just check
and answer both.
Just now I performed the following steps:
1. Purged the supervisor package,
2. removed the PPA `nacc/lp1594740',
3. ran `apt-get update',
A minor follow up to my previous comment for anyone else testing this:
Correctly testing the fixed package is a bit subtle because if you
simply run 'apt purge supervisor' the symbolic link /etc/systemd/system
/multi-user.target.wants/supervisor.service (which was created by a
previous manual invo
Hi Nish and thank you so much for backporting a fix to xenial!
I can confirm that with the version of Supervisor in your PPA the
original issue I reported is resolved, i.e. by the time 'apt install
supervisor' returns, the Supervisor daemon has been started. Also both
of the commands I mentioned i
I contacted ubuntu-devel-disc...@lists.ubuntu.com to inquire whether
it's possible to get the bug fix in the Debian package backported to
Ubuntu 16.04, here's my message:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-
discuss/2016-September/016866.html
--
You received this bug notification beca
Hi Orestis and thanks for following up here even though you're a
_Debian_ package maintainer and not an _Ubuntu_ package maintainer :-).
Am I assuming correctly that the Debian bug report you are referring to
is the following? https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-
bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=827729
I will inves
Public bug reported:
Expected behavior
=
In Ubuntu 10.04, 12.04 and 14.04 after running "apt-get install
supervisor" the Supervisor daemon is automatically enabled (to start on
boot) and started (so that Supervisor is running by the time apt-get
returns).
What actually happens
==
@ubuntu devs: Since this has the potential to break lots servers in
various nasty ways it might (?) be wise to post a heads up to a mailing
list that's (hopefully) followed by lots of sysadmins like ubuntu-
security-announce. I'm guessing there's a whole policy about what should
and should not be s
@Will:
You're right. The arrow keys also work when I log-in as a user without a
~/.vimrc file and manually :set nocompatible after starting Vim. Sorry
for the noise I guess.
One thing though, the above implies to me that the problem is inside my
own ~/.vimrc script (correct?) but I don't understa
I'm pretty sure there's a real bug somewhere deep inside of Ubuntu
(maybe some system wide thing like termcap or whatever it's called)
causing this behavior. I've used Ubuntu's Vim packages for years, always
getting annoyed about the described bug.
1. I've created ~/.vimrc, it's nonempty and it's
The attachments above were added automatically by apport and I just
noticed that DpkgTerminalLog.txt contains a few irrelevant entries from
a few hours *before* this happened, but no entries that are relevant to
this bug report... I'm attaching /var/log/dpkg.log in the hope that it
will be more use
** Attachment added: "AptOrdering.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/49943773/AptOrdering.txt
** Attachment added: "Dependencies.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/49943774/Dependencies.txt
** Attachment added: "Dmesg.gz"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/49943775/Dmesg.gz
** Attachment ad
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: openoffice.org
I guess this happened during an automatic security update because I
wasn't running any update manager at the time that I noticed the apport
bug report popping up in Gnome's notification area. I was however
running OpenOffice writer, which m
I can confirm (for what it is worth) that running BlueProximity and
OpenOffice Writer at the same time causes the File menu in OpenOffice
writer to open unexpectedly every N seconds, where N is the "Command
interval" configured in BlueProximity. For those who don't know
BlueProximity, it locks your
26 matches
Mail list logo
