Hey Steve,
After applying last updates, mountall hangs again.
When killing it, terminal becomes unstable.
I start up without quiet and splash in grub kernel commandline.
Otherwise system hangs up to 5 minutes on graphical screen.
Filesystem check goed up to 71%, then counting up very slowly.
Cas
How do you explain the following then?
When I remove 'quiet splash' form the grub kernel commandline, the system boots
up quickly.
No hangs on fsck there.
Otherwise behavior as said. I'll investigate.
--
ply_boot_client_flush() does not read replies (plymouth stuck during/after
filesystem che
I just waited it out -> 5:30 minutes before having a reachable server.
mountall hasnt finished yet:
root 315 1 2 10:30 ?00:00:07 mountall --daemon
Info for you to reproduce:
/etc/default/cryptdisks:
CRYPTDISKS_ENABLE=No
CRYPTDISKS_MOUNT=""
CRYPTDISKS_CHECK=blkid
CRYPTDISKS_PR
Ok, I purged cryptsetup to see if it caused the problems. It doesn't.
I find it *very strange* that you cannot reproduce the error, as it
seems quite simple to reproduce on this side.
With 'quiet splash' on the grub kernel commandline, and 1 ext4 partition to
check at startup I get this problem.
Oh, and just to be complete:
THis happens for me only on 10.04 64-bit server, not on 64-bit desktop.
--
ply_boot_client_flush() does not read replies (plymouth stuck during/after
filesystem check or error)
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/554737
You received this bug notification because you are
I've had it with plymouth.
Why use this crap anyway on server dists?
We had a good and working server dist before it.
And who needs fancy splash screens on a server anyway?
Come on Canonical, drop the whole stuff for server.
It's not ready for release yet. And you guys know it.
Debian did the ri
I totally agree, Ingo.
As said before I see the need for hiding all kinds of stuff from the average
user, but there are alternatives for that.
And for desktop startup there can a lot be done there, just by using VESA modes.
As for servers: server dists should become less dependant on hardware.
Wh
... my fstab is as fresh as a just-born baby, same one as I installed at
install time.
We'll see again in some time about plymouth.
I surely hope for Ubuntu that you're right and I'm wrong.
Time will tell.
--
ply_boot_client_flush() does not read replies (plymouth stuck during/after
filesystem
srv-1-lucid-20100430-1.tgz and srv-1-lucid-20100430-1.png
'quiet splash' set in grub kernel commandline
takes 6:30 to complete
srv-1-lucid-20100430-2.tgz and srv-1-lucid-20100430-2.png
*NO* 'quiet splash' set in grub kernel commandline
takes 00:26 to complete
** Attachment added: "bootlogs + pic
I did a fresh installation on my desktop machine (64-bit) also.
Still has the bug. Removing 'splash' fixed the problem, as before.
--
fsck progress stalls at boot, plymouthd/mountall eats CPU
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/571707
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubu
Could it be that it is hardware related?
commands I used:
bios: hwinfo --bios | grep Socket:
video: hwinfo --gfxcard | grep Modules:
desktop 64-bit:
bios: Socket: "LGA1366"
video: Driver Modules: "nvidia"
server 64-bit:
bios: Socket: "Socket437"
graphics: Model: "Intel 945G"
frnste
> Arand:
> I would guess that it is not hardware related, since I'm seeing this on a
> virtualbox 32bit.
I just tested a fresh 32-bit installation within virtualbox.
No problems whatsoever (with or without quiet/flash).
I don't see any progressmeter, by the way.
This could mean it *IS* hardware
People, can everyone (with or without problems) run the two hwinfo
commands mentioned (with grep please) , so we can see if there's a
connection between hardware and the behavior of plymouth ?
As allready said, mine are:
desktop 64-bit:
bios: Socket: "LGA1366"
video: Driver Modules: "nvidia"
What's the status of this?
Any progress?
Canonical?
--
kcryptd process doesn't utilize multiple cpus
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/246413
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.u
Just as a sidenote, because the problems seem to be fixed now.
For anyone who would like to fully use plymouth now on desktop systems:
in synaptic:
purge plymouth-theme-*
install plymouth-theme-solar
For a high-res startup (even on nvidia and ati), see:
http://idyllictux.wordpress.com/201
Problem seems to be fixed here.
Progress runs up to 100%, like it should, no delays anymore.
My 64-bit desktop starts up fine now. Great work.
When will this be updated in the repository (when no problems are
found)?
--
fsck progress stalls at boot, plymouthd/mountall eats CPU
https://bugs.launc
Thanks for the link, arand.
Good to see canonical takes this seriously.
But, is this a critical update? Guess not.
So we can't expect an official (non-PPA) update very soon?
--
fsck progress stalls at boot, plymouthd/mountall eats CPU
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/571707
You received this bu
@Dekar
I understand.
But, if Canonical adds the possibility of encrypted home, then they also
introduce this problem.
I wouldn't call it a bug, as it works as intended, but anyway.
Canonical also chose to implement plymouth in 10.04 (Debian put it back
to testing) and solved most of it's proble
Sorry, should have given you the link for plymouth progress:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mountall/+bug/571707
--
kcryptd process doesn't utilize multiple cpus
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/246413
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
The problem is reproducable.
After latest updates my 10.04 Ubuntu Desktop (with cryptdisk) also hangs in
startup.
Ctrl-Alt-Del is working.
Switching to one of the tty's (Ctrl-Alt-Fx) doesn't.
The system seems to be up (server edition was reachable with SSH).
Maybe it has something to do with my
OK, it doesnt seem to be related to my script.
In my script I set as root (after booting) CRYPTDISKS_ENABLE to Yes in
/etc/default/cryptdisks.
Then I restart the crypdisks service, enter the password, it tries to mount the
disk, and I put a No in /etc/default/cryptdisks for the next boot.
Works
sorry, ENABLE_AT_STARTUP should be CRYPTDISKS_ENABLE, of course.
--
no password prompt for cryptsetup in 10.04 64-bit server
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/560105
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing l
Hmmm, I'm puzzled again.
Just upgraded 10.04 server and desktop to kernel 2.6.32-20.
Desktop starts up fine (without asking for a password).
I'm able (from commandline) to start my encrypted disk with service cryptdisks
restart now.
On server I still have a hanging plymouth.
I'm getting kinda
With all due respect, Steve, after all the instability problems with
cryptsetup in the last 2 years, I'm wondering if I'm indeed the only
user left ;-)
--
no password prompt for cryptsetup in 10.04 64-bit server
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/560105
You received this bug notification because you
.. and it's 10.04 BETA, so I'm not sure how many users there are.
But OK, I've attached the gdb backtrace output.
** Attachment added: "gdb backtrace"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/43916814/gdb-bt.txt
--
no password prompt for cryptsetup in 10.04 64-bit server
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs
with debugging symbols:
gdb /sbin/plymouthd 250
(gdb) bt
#0 0x7f99c2742500 in write () from /lib/libc.so.6
#1 0x7f99c2c0bd8b in ply_write (fd=7, buffer=0x40a7d0,
number_of_bytes=) at ply-utils.c:306
#2 0x00404797 in ply_boot_connection_on_request (connection=0x80ad70)
at ply-
> after all the instability problems with cryptsetup in the last 2 years
I have to correct myself on this, it's Ubuntu boot process that made it
instable
--
no password prompt for cryptsetup in 10.04 64-bit server
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/560105
You received this bug notification because
Might that process be 'mountall', like I mentioned in #9?
message was:
mountall: Plymouth command failed
--
no password prompt for cryptsetup in 10.04 64-bit server
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/560105
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscr
Reading symbols from /sbin/mountall...Reading symbols from
/usr/lib/debug/sbin/mountall...done.
done.
Attaching to program: /sbin/mountall, process 343
Reading symbols from /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2...(no debugging symbols
found)...done.
Loaded symbols for /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
[Thread de
You might want to check
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/plymouth/+bug/554737
I think it's what is talked about here.
Same symptoms.
--
Lucid boot failed to complete after fsck
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/554079
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
The updated plymouth packages solved it for me.
Disk check completes normally in splash screen, after that -> tty.
As expected.
Great work, Steve.
--
ply_boot_client_flush() does not read replies (plymouth stuck during/after
filesystem check or error)
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/554737
You
Nice one, ingo. Long live open source, lol.
While my server is headless, I don't mind the dependancies.
I however support the opinion that the dependancy should be optional.
--
Please remove the plymouth dependency from mountall / cryptsetup
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/556372
You received th
Hey ingo,
I totally understand. I also like to see what's going on.
But...
If Ubuntu wants to be a major desktop (it does), it has to take into account
that most users don't want to know.
And users are always right, of course. I guess plymouth plays its part in that.
As for patching the packa
I agree with you on the 1st and 2nd part.
It should only be in 10.04 LTS if it's stable. Period.
It would be nice if plymouth could be removed, especially when it's not totally
stable.
However I have the fealing that Ubuntu is more or less more testing then stable
if you compare it to Debian.
Bu
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: plymouth
When copy/moving a large file from an encrypted volume -while logged in
on an encrypted home- on my I7 with SATA-300 disk, my 9.10 64-bit
desktop slows down considerably.
I noticed I have 4 crypto processes running.
When I move/copy the file wh
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: cryptsetup
I normally manually run a short script that will restart the cryptdisks.
It will ask for the password and the script will mount the encrypted filsystem.
/etc/crypttab:
#
secure /dev/sda6 none
Some extra information:
1) splash hangs also
2) strace output is attached
** Attachment added: "strace cryptsetup restart"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/43700517/strace.cryptsetup.txt
--
no password prompt for cryptsetup in 10.04 64-bit server
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/560105
You rece
The device (as in /dev/sda6) is not mounted, of course. There aren't any
/dev/mapper devices either, only /dev/mapper/control.
On the /dev/sda disk there are 3 filesystems in use (root, swap and data).
--
no password prompt for cryptsetup in 10.04 64-bit server
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/56
Thanks for replying.
strace -o strace.txt -ff service cryptdisks restart
results in one tracefile per pid, from which I attached the two that did
not normally finish (I pressed Ctrl-C).
Regards
** Attachment added: "strace.tar"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/43766585/strace.tar
--
no passwo
** Attachment added: "all strace files"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/43767306/strace.tar.gz
--
no password prompt for cryptsetup in 10.04 64-bit server
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/560105
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ub
I don't know, actually.
The system has been upgraded since the alpha-1 stage.
So maybe it's some residue from earlier stages?
Would it been wise to reinstall (and update/upgrade) ?
Strange thing is that my Ubuntu 64-bit desktop installation doesnt seem
to have this problem.
--
no password prom
Could it be that "plymouth quit" is just not working ?
root 247 1 0 12:20 ?00:00:02 /sbin/plymouthd --mode=boot
--attach-to-session --pid-file=/dev/.initramfs/plymouth.pid
root 882 1 0 12:20 ?00:00:00 /bin/plymouth quit
root 1587 1105 0 15:40 pts/2
If I manually kill the plymouth commands:
mountall: Plymouth command failed
Seems it's going wrong in mountall ?
--
no password prompt for cryptsetup in 10.04 64-bit server
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/560105
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which i
After killing the plymouth stuff manually, I'm able to use cryptdisks.
For now I 've adapted my script to kill everything called plymouth ;-)
--
no password prompt for cryptsetup in 10.04 64-bit server
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/560105
You received this bug notification because you are a me
reassigned to package cryptsetup
** Package changed: linux (Ubuntu) => cryptsetup (Ubuntu)
** Changed in: cryptsetup (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Invalid
--
kcryptd not multithreaded?
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/564504
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Where do we ask to get the "new functionality" of multithreaded kcryptd?
When copying/moving a large file from an encrypted volume -while logged in on
an encrypted home- on my I7 with SATA-300 disk, my 9.10 64-bit desktop slows
down considerably.
When I move/copy the file while logged in on an u
@Josh Brown: I really appreciate that you're trying to answer my questions, and
thanks for your suggestion.
I'm not sure if a question there would produce any answers, though ;-)
>From the the page at
>https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/MainlineBuilds?action=show&redirect=KernelMainlineBuilds:
1) "T
So, if I understand right, there is general consensus not to add TRIM support
to the current Long Time Support version of Ubuntu.
With all due respect, please add some wisdom to that choice, as I (and a lot of
other users) have good reasons to run LTS on their systems.
The message Ubuntu is send
@Josh Brown: thx for your reaction.
I can understand that it would be a lot of work because all filesystem and
utility related stuff would have to be updated also, besides the kernel
backport patching.
I would very much appreciate if someone from Canonical would comment on this,
as I feel when
Grmpf, I'm getting annoyed by the non-informing attitude of Canonical.
A while ago heaven and earth was moved for something as insignificant as
plymouth.
Which still gives me an ugly startup on my Nvidia card with proprietary
drivers, by the way.
But for proper SSD support I have to install a n
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: parted
I run parted (version 2.2 on Ubuntu 10.04 64-bit) to get output of
partition information.
On my machine I have an encrypted parttion /dev/mapper/secure1.
It is mapped on /dev/sda7, which is in an extented partition.
Disk partition scheme is MBR.
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: apt
Using 10.04 LTS server, 64-bit
Current version of apt: 0.7.25.3ubuntu9.3
When performing an 'apt-get update', the complete repo is shown.
Example:
Hit http://nl.archive.ubuntu.com lucid-updates/restricted Packages
Hit http://nl.archive.ubuntu.
No one?
This should'nt be too hard to fix, is it ?
--
apt-get upgrade prints incomplete repo's
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/663864
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.
Hmmm, just to be sure I recreated the HFS partition non-case sensitive.
No problems anymore.
I think it's still a bug, but it would be a duplicate then.
Thanks for not reacting any way.
** Changed in: parted (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because y
Ah, good someone picked up the problem, thanks Julian.
Maybe via an (extra) commandline option then (as in --showcomponents) ?
Existing tools parsing the output would have no problems then.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubu
Hmmm, wishlist.
Is there a way to track proposed changes?
Or a better -more direct- way to contact the developers?
Maybe at Debian?
--
apt-get upgrade prints incomplete repo's
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/663864
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, whic
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: apt
On server installations I need changelog info before updating any packages, so
I can inform the administrator of any changes.
After that he/she can decide what updates are going to be done.
Currently it's (to my knowledge) only possible to see chang
Bump.
That didn't occur to me yet, man do I feel stupid.
I'll take a look at the source, and if I can do it, I'll post a patch.
Thanks for the suggestion, David
--
apt-get upgrade prints incomplete repo's
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/663864
You received this bug notification because you are
Good idea, download but not install, extract changelog.
Within current possibilities that seems to be the best option.
As I see it, it would not be a great deal for Canonical/Debian to create
online combined Changelog information per repository of all updates. It
would just be another cron job.
B
Hi David, thanks for answering.
What I would like to see is a list of only the changes that lead to the actual
update.
So, not the complete changelog for the package, just the last one belonging to
the update.
No changelog if a package hasn't been updated.
One XML link/file per repository, with
... and just to be complete:
not only per repository, but also per release.
An XML link could be then (links are fictious):
for main updates for lucid
https://changelog.launchpad.net/release/lucid/lastupdates.xml?repository
=lucid-updates/main
or for security updates for hardy:
https://change
.. or maybe even better:
apt-get update also downloads the XML file that is present at the
repository.
Just like the ls-lR.gz file.
--
Changelog before upgrading?
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/666277
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscrib
I just saw that updatemanager on my gnome desktop also has changleog info
before installing the packages.
Exactly what I need.
I'll find out via the source of updatemanager.
Thx.
--
Changelog before upgrading?
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/666277
You received this bug notification because yo
Bummer, I thought I'd check in to see if there was some progress made.
NO PROGRESS ?
--
kcryptd process doesn't utilize multiple cpus
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/246413
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs
64 matches
Mail list logo
