GRUB_TIMEOUT_STYLE=menu
GRUB_TIMEOUT=5
should still give you the behaviour you expect.
are you saying that that doesnt happen? i am a little bit confused about
this ticket
** Changed in: grub2 (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Incomplete
--
You received this bug notification because you are a mem
> And all, despite of everything in order, only because someone had
decided that "hidden" is now supposed to be followed strictly and
actually hide the grub menu irrespective.
I am not aware of such a change being made recently, at least I
certainly did not make such a change over the last 12 mont
Okay I think we can add a `detach` option to casper to allow for this
usecase.
I don't think this a bug strictly speaking, but there is a legitimate
usecase for the feature.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs
Hmm okay, and it's grub-pc. I'll try to reproduce this myself as well.
** Changed in: grub2 (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Mate Kukri (mkukri)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launc
Subscribing ubuntu-release as this likely won't make 24.10 beta and will
need a release note.
The grub is signed now and should be ready for oracular release however.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launch
** Changed in: grub2 (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => New
** Tags added: foundations-todo
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080785
Title:
Wrong defaults after (deprecated) changes
This should be already marked fix released in Noble.
** Changed in: grub2 (Ubuntu Noble)
Status: New => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054103
Title:
grub-pc rein
** Changed in: grub2 (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080785
Title:
Wrong defaults after (deprecated) changes: #GRUB_TIMEOUT_STYLE
To manage n
I have managed to reproduce it, I have update grub clearly adding a
Windows 10, but the timeout adjustment code isn't added to grub.cfg...
EDIT: hmm so it seems because /etc/grub.d/30_os-prober doesn't set
find_other_os=1 for the BIOS chainboot case. It does seem to work for
EFI versions of window
Okay so I actually think this is and was for a long time intended behavior:
- on UEFI, you get the timeout override with os-prober entries because we
cannot detect modifier keys
- on BIOS, it's intended you hold the shift key which will get the GRUB menu to
show.
If you prefer a different behavi
I think it's disingenuous to say that dual booting two operating systems
on one computer is something non-technical users who don't understand
this do. And also I think it's legitimately possible that users used to
prefer the intended UX where you can boot the "default OS" without a
timeout, and ho
** Patch added: "2-gobi-loader_0.7-0ubuntu7.diff"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gobi-loader/+bug/2071459/+attachment/5793862/+files/2-gobi-loader_0.7-0ubuntu7.diff
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https:/
** Changed in: gobi-loader (Ubuntu)
Status: In Progress => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2071459
Title:
Respect CC and CFLAGS environment variables (frame pointer
** Changed in: grub2-unsigned (Ubuntu Mantic)
Status: Fix Committed => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2043101
Title:
Mantic+noble inadvertently includes the luks2
=> Won't Fix
** Changed in: grub2-unsigned (Ubuntu Mantic)
Assignee: Mate Kukri (mkukri) => (unassigned)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2039081
Title:
UEFI HTTP boot regress
** Changed in: grub2 (Ubuntu Mantic)
Status: Fix Committed => Fix Released
** Changed in: grub2-unsigned (Ubuntu Mantic)
Status: Fix Committed => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.
Is this a virtual machine running a cloud image by any chance?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2072819
Title:
package grub-efi-amd64-signed 1.202+2.12-1ubuntu7 failed to
install/upgr
Public bug reported:
Do it
** Affects: bpfcc (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Assignee: Mate Kukri (mkukri)
Status: New
** Changed in: bpfcc (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Mate Kukri (mkukri)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubu
** Description changed:
- grub-pc requires knowing what device to grub-install on, but when cloud
- images are generated, the device on the deployment target is never
- known. And so when the package is reinstalled (for example, when
- unminimizing the minimized image), the user gets that prompt,
** Description changed:
[ Impact ]
- * We have changed GRUB2 packaging to have two installation modes,
-"cloud style", and default.
+ * We have changed GRUB2 packaging to have two installation modes,
+ "cloud style", and default.
- * The cloud style one should be used, and is use
Was the installation done in the same VM with the same configuration as
the upgrade?
Looks like the expected GRUB install disk isn't there.
Maybe try dpkg-reconfigure grub-efi-amd64-signed and choose the install
disk for grub
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubu
It is a different problem then in the ticket, but yes what seems to be
happening is that MAAS deploys cloud images which come pre-set with
cloud_style_installation true, but this should be reset to false when
deployed to real hardware. Whether this should be done with cloud-init
or something else,
So this is = Depends on grub2-signed from jammy-updates, but won't build
while there is a newer one in jammy-proposed. That is a non-critical
update and likely wont be verified before the point release, so getting
it temporarily removed so that we can build this against shim 15.8 but
the 14.4 grub
** Summary changed:
- [SRU] Rebuild cd-boot-images-{amd64,arm64} against new shim and grub
+ [SRU] Rebuild cd-boot-images-{amd64,arm64} against new shim
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2
Okay that does sound like we did break 64-bit Windows chainloading,
which I will look at.
The 32-bit stuff and mixed, mode I am not interested in.
** Changed in: grub2 (Ubuntu)
Status: Invalid => Confirmed
** Changed in: grub2 (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Mate Kukri (
The issue in Oracular's GRUB is not in shim, the peimage module got
broken either during the NX work, or a mismerge of the latest Debian
GRUB.
That warning is not optimal, but there is a regression here vs Noble.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, whic
So it is hitting this check in peimage
if (section->raw_data_size > section->virtual_size)
{
grub_dprintf ("peimage", "section data larger than virtual
size\n");
return GRUB_EFI_LOAD_ERROR;
}
Turns out the PE spec actually allows for
Do you have a non-standard kernel installed by any chance?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2078487
Title:
package grub-efi-amd64-signed 1.202+2.12-1ubuntu7 failed to
install/upgrade:
The patch for Windows chainloading is prepared and will be uploaded for
oracular beta, as this is a supported feature for Ubuntu installs and
unfortunately got broken by accident.
And yes the 32-bit EFI GRUB was clearly considered and discarded, no one
has cared about it for years. Most old device
You need to pull the code from https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-uefi-
team/grub/+git/ubuntu/+ref/ubuntu?, and the version you want is
2.12-5ubuntu5...
That will boot Windows 10 and 11 just fine. Test that
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is s
You are using the wrong source for our GRUB, that's up there is a sync
of versions uploaded to the Ubuntu archive.
The primary development repository currently is at
https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-uefi-team/grub/+git/ubuntu (the
"ubuntu" branch is what you want)
--
You received this bug noti
Are you using a 64-bit build of that code? Are you using 64-bit Windows?
How did you build and install it?
I am pretty sure it boots Windows 10 bootmgfw.efi, because I tested it
myself.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
I have tested Windows 11 22H2 and the 23H2 ISO, and Windows 10 LTSC 2021
and all those work fine. Please make sure you use the correct branch
and/or version tag and ensure the binary you built is really from it, as
I think the code I've pushed to ~ubuntu-uefi-team should be functional.
--
You rec
This bug report unfortunately doesn't have enough information to triage
the bug anyways. The exact output of package configuration and a
detailed description of your system configuration is required to debug
this.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, whic
This seems to look like a cloud image installation which enable a new
feature in GRUB on upgrades.
What disk configuration is this deployed on and how was it installed?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.laun
Did the disk configuration change on these since the original OS
installation?
It seems like /dev/disk/by-id/nvme-eui.002538d31144766b-part1 should be
pointing to the ESP but doesn't exist. (Unless of course it's a kernel
bug and that file got renamed).
This looks sorta like https://bugs.launchpa
** Changed in: shim-signed (Ubuntu)
Status: Fix Committed => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2036604
Title:
Synchronous Exception when booting VMs via qemu-efi-aarc
There is also riscv and ppc64el but no SB so we dont care that much.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080011
Title:
Rebuild cd-boot-images-* against new GRUB
To manage notifications a
Public bug reported:
cd-boot-images in oracular are currently built against an outdated GRUB.
However we also have a chainloading bugfix for GRUB that should be
uploaded first:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/2078307
** Affects: cd-boot-images-amd64 (Ubuntu)
Importance:
As I said I've prepared a fix and it's waiting for upload to Oracular.
In the meantime I've done some test builds here:
- https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-uefi-team/+archive/ubuntu/build/+build/28929792
- https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-uefi-team/+archive/ubuntu/build/+build/28929800
After these are b
Hi,
Can you also do `debconf-show grub-pc`?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2079866
Title:
grub-pc configure fails during upgrade from 22.04 to 24.04
To manage notifications about th
> Tried to build https://github.com/TNTwise/REAL-Video-Enhancer from git
> It failed..
> Building GUI
> sh: 1: pyside6-uic: not found
> Building resources.rc
> sh: 1: pyside6-rcc: not found
> Building executable
> running build_exe
> error: Cannot find required utility `patchelf` in PATH
> did rebo
> od:
> /sys/firmware/efi/efivars/SecureBoot-8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c:
> Input/output error
> /usr/share/grub/grub-check-signatures: 22: [: Illegal number:
What kind of machine is this running on? The first line is rather odd.
** Changed in: grub2-signed (Ubuntu)
Status: Ne
** Changed in: grub2 (Ubuntu Oracular)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Mate Kukri (mkukri)
** Tags added: foundations-todo
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2076651
Title:
[SRU] Cr
** Summary changed:
- Enable suppression of /EndEntire message
+ [SRU] Enable suppression of /EndEntire message
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2073634
Title:
[SRU] Enable suppression
Hmm it seems like `grub-{ef,pc}/cloud_style_installation: true` is wrong
for this set up.
Seems like the upgrader thinks this installation was deployed from a
cloud image.
Does `/etc/cloud/build.info` exist on your system? What does it say?
--
You received this bug notification because you are
** Changed in: casper (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Mate Kukri (mkukri)
** Tags added: foundations-todo
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/684280
Title:
casper toram forg
You need to use a non-NX shim if you are chainloading a version of
Windows that doesn't have the NX_COMPAT flag set.
This is not a bug anymore but expected results I think. Try using the
current non-NX Ubuntu shim to load your grub in the first place.
--
You received this bug notification becaus
No, but if your shim does not enforce NX, like the Ubuntu shim, that is
fine.
The need to use a non-NX shim will remain to be the case until Windows
bootloader sets NX_COMPAT.
You need to boot Ubuntu shim (or another non-NX shim) -> Ubuntu GRUB ->
Windows and that will work. No other path will, b
> Do you mean that if the shim does not enforce the NX flag, then Ubuntu
GRUB2 will not check the NX flag of Windows?
That is exactly correct you just need a shim that doesn't set NX flag
and doesn't enforce it.
> Or, when applying the Ubuntu patches to GRUB2, is it possible to avoid
using the pa
** Changed in: grub2 (Ubuntu Noble)
Status: Confirmed => Fix Committed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2073634
Title:
[SRU] Enable suppression of /EndEntire message
To manage n
Committed to git branch for Oracular. Since the current upload was
already sent for signing, it won't be in that one, but the next.
For Noble the SRU upload is prepared in the build PPA.
Both will need sponsorship.
** Changed in: grub2 (Ubuntu Oracular)
Status: New => Fix Committed
** Ch
** Changed in: cd-boot-images-amd64 (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => Fix Released
** Changed in: cd-boot-images-arm64 (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.l
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 2076929 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2076929
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 2076929
[SRU] Rebuild cd-boot-images-{amd64,arm64} against new shim
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
We need this for oracular beta, subscribing juliank.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080011
Title:
Rebuild cd-boot-images-* against new GRUB
To manage notifications about this bug go
Already fixed in Oracular.
SRU for noble, jammy, and focal (which will just be a binary copy of
jammy) prepared in the build PPA.
This will need an uploader (subscribing juliank).
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https
Hi,
It looks like your /etc/grub.d/40_custom file is corrupt, please double
check that and retry the update.
** Changed in: grub2 (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Incomplete
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.
That is not an Ubuntu problem, we only care about applying the whole
patchstack. Those two patches will be squashed down and will go away on
the next Debian merge anyway.
Also please bare in mind that if you only partially use our sources, and
don't use our build system, please do not claim during
So I've tried to reproduce this on Oracular 24.10 with the Flutter
desktop installer, and I belive this is no longer a problem.
I've create a disk like:
- sda1 - vfat - /boot/efi
- sda2 - ext4 - /boot + Oracular ISO
- sda3 - ext4 - ubuntu partition
Booting the ISO via grub using:
set isofile=o
I am not sure if modifying the same partition the ISO is actively being
used from should be supported.
Or are you wanting this to only work when the ISO is used from RAM only?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bu
But I don't think this is strictly a bug, but I think detaching if toram
is in bootargs is probably fine, i'll take another look at this later.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/684280
Tit
** Changed in: shim-signed (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080571
Title:
package shim-signed 1.40.10+15.8-0ubuntu1 failed to install/upgrade:
I believe this can now be re-enabled in Oracular.
Noble already shipped with shim 15.8 and Oracular also ships the new
shim.
Desktop TPM FDE and some versions nullboot still use the old shim, but
are those a concerns for the in-archive edk2?
--
You received this bug notification because you are
Is there any practical utility for this? I don't think that is a
supported use case, and *someone might use this* isn't a justifiable
reason to significantly increase our Secure Boot attack surface.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed
Undecided
Status: New
** Changed in: shim (Ubuntu Focal)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Mate Kukri (mkukri)
** Changed in: shim (Ubuntu Jammy)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Mate Kukri (mkukri)
** Changed in: shim (Ubuntu Mantic)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Mate Kukri (mkukri)
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 2056562 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2056562
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 2056562
shim-signed 1.57+15.8-0ubuntu1 upgrade failing due to
grub-common/2.12-1ubuntu3 still being present during installation
--
You received this bug n
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1940723 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1940723
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 1940723
GRUB (re)installation failing due to stale grub-{pc,efi}/install_devices
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
B
Loopback booting from an ISO image isn't really an intended use-case.
The hybrid ISOs can be directly written to raw a USB block device and
booted that way.
We are aware of Debian support for f2fs and intentionally decided to
remove it in Ubuntu.
--
You received this bug notification because you
** Description changed:
- We should update shim and shim-signed to 15.8, this version addresses
- multiple security issues.
+ [Impact]
+
+ shim 15.7 is affected by multiple CVEs, including a critical severity
+ one allowing Secure Boot bypass when netbooting.
+
+ [Test Plan]
+
+ Make sure the s
** Changed in: grub2-unsigned (Ubuntu Mantic)
Status: New => Invalid
** Changed in: grub2-unsigned (Ubuntu Mantic)
Status: Invalid => Fix Committed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.n
This is now in proposed, setting to 'Fix committed'
** Changed in: grub2 (Ubuntu Noble)
Status: Triaged => Fix Committed
** Changed in: grub2 (Ubuntu Mantic)
Status: New => Won't Fix
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed
Someone please sponsor, this fixes a clitest autopkgtest regression
caused by the introduction of the test framework patch.
** Patch added: "tree-1-2.1.1-2ubuntu3.diff"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/tree/+bug/2056099/+attachment/5762166/+files/tree-1-2.1.1-2ubuntu3.diff
--
You r
Public bug reported:
Current package versions fails to build due to a `memmem` prototype
mismatch: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dcraw/9.28-5build1
** Affects: dcraw (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
** Patch added: "dcraw-1-9.28-5ubuntu1.diff"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dcraw/+bug/2060672/+attachment/5762727/+files/dcraw-1-9.28-5ubuntu1.diff
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.
Public bug reported:
LP: #2052809 [MIR] bpftrace should have provided autopkgtests for
bpftrace.
However upstream has disabled building the tests, and a rebase of the
previous patch pulled that in resulting in the current failure mode:
https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/bpftrace
Re-enabling
** Patch added: "bpftrace-1-0.20.2-1ubuntu4.diff"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/bpftrace/+bug/2060682/+attachment/5762746/+files/bpftrace-1-0.20.2-1ubuntu4.diff
** Tags added: rls-nn-incoming update-excuse
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
B
** Attachment added: "LastTest.log"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/bpftrace/+bug/2060682/+attachment/5762771/+files/LastTest.log
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2060682
Ti
Public bug reported:
Fails to build on multiple architectures
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/magics++/4.15.3-1build1
** Affects: magics++ (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscr
Can you provide a bit more detail about the exact disk layout being used
here?
Is the RAID on the bare disks, or are there partition tables containing
the RAID?
Also is there a partition table inside the raid, or is it directly
formatted as ext4?
Is LVM used anywhere?
--
You received this bug
Could you try dpkg-reconfigure grub-pc and selecting the disks
themselves?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2060695
Title:
24.04 grub-pc cannot upgrade on mirrored software RAID root di
Did you set grub-pc/install-devices (e.g. through package configuration)
yourself, or is it from the installer?
> * grub-pc/install_devices: /dev/disk/by-id/md-name-ubuntu-server:0
I'd expect grub-pc/install_devices to contain the raw disks themselves
e.g. to be /dev/vda /dev/vdb and not the raid
This was fixed independently by vorlon in dcraw 9.28-5ubuntu1
** Changed in: dcraw (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Won't Fix
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2060672
Title:
dcraw ftbfs
This seems to be the same error as test failures in
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/bpftrace/+bug/2060682
My guess is it being LLVM-18
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2060766
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 2060766 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2060766
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 2060766
Can't run bpftrace , ERROR: too many arguments
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed t
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 2060766 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2060766
** Patch removed: "bpftrace-1-0.20.2-1ubuntu4.diff"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/bpftrace/+bug/2060682/+attachment/5762746/+files/bpftrace-1-0.20.2-1ubuntu4.diff
--
You received this bug n
** Patch added: "bpftrace-1-0.20.2-1ubuntu4.diff"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/bpftrace/+bug/2060766/+attachment/5763328/+files/bpftrace-1-0.20.2-1ubuntu4.diff
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bu
Yeah you are right, this seems to be uncovered by the removal of that
workaround (the issue it solved wasn't related to this, and was solved
better in the meantime).
That seems to indicate that this was a different bug for a long time
that was hidden by that workaround.
I'll take another look at
** Changed in: bpftrace (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided => Critical
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2060766
Title:
Can't run bpftrace , ERROR: too many arguments
To manage notificat
@cks I think I have it down to the installer configuring wrong values
for grub debconf install_devices.
** Changed in: subiquity
Importance: Undecided => High
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.n
** Tags added: foundations-todo
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2060695
Title:
24.04 grub-pc cannot upgrade on mirrored software RAID root disk
To manage notifications about this bug
Confirmed that this issue is definitely caused by cloud-init replacing
grub debconf with an incorrect value upon first boot.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2060695
Title:
24.04 grub-p
It looks like the installer is actually doing the correct thing, but
then upon first boot the debconf magically contains a different value.
Currently suspecting cloud-init
** Also affects: cloud-init (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Changed in: subiquity
Status: New
** Changed in: cloud-init (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Mate Kukri (mkukri)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2060695
Title:
24.04 grub-pc cannot upgrade on mirrored softw
Patch to remove the cloud init grub_dpkg module. This is no longer necessary:
- Curtin sets the debconf value itself
- cloud images now use the 'grub-{efi,pc}/cloud_style_installation' option
which ignores `install_devices`
** Patch added: "cloud-init-1-24.1.3-0ubuntu4.diff"
https://bugs.lau
Public bug reported:
https://objectstorage.prodstack5.canonical.com/swift/v1/AUTH_0f9aae918d5b4744bf7b827671c86842/autopkgtest-
noble/noble/armhf/p/pyfuse3/20240410_221201_3ced2@/log.gz
** Affects: pyfuse3 (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug notific
Upon further digging it seems one of the tests try to put the newly
64-bit timestamps into a sqlite3 database's INT type:
root@autopkgtest-lxd-dmjxfz:/tmp/autopkgtest.c6ltL9/build.h9M/src# Traceback
(most recent call last):
File "/tmp/autopkgtest.c6ltL9/build.h9M/src/examples/tmpfs.py", line 45
Actually it might a time_t abi problem.
the sqlite3 integers are 64-bit, and in the file creation function it produces
a value such as
1712840079336130048 with length 61 bits which fits.
however the mtime attribute update in the same tmpfs example produces a 91 bit
timestamp such as
14429008790
Looks like the time_t type and struct stat structure known to cython is wrong
and that is resulting in bad values:
https://github.com/cython/cython/blob/master/Cython/Includes/posix/types.pxd
** Also affects: cython (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Tags added: update-excus
Reported upstream at https://github.com/cython/cython/issues/6142
** Bug watch added: github.com/cython/cython/issues #6142
https://github.com/cython/cython/issues/6142
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.l
@sylon This is just waiting for archive admin approval, right?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2060766
Title:
Can't run bpftrace , ERROR: too many arguments
To manage notifications ab
1 - 100 of 892 matches
Mail list logo
