Hello list,
I'm looking for as many logwatch runs in Fedora 16 as possible. I need to test the F17 package so I know if there are any problems with compatibility.
Please, consider installing the new build [1], running it, sending me a logwatch report and possibly sending logs (obfuscated if need be) if there are any unmatched entries.
You can run logwatch like so: logwatch --range all --service all
[1] http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=317339
Thank you!
On 04/05/12 09:35, Jan Synacek wrote:
Hello list,
I'm looking for as many logwatch runs in Fedora 16 as possible. I need to test the F17 package so I know if there are any problems with compatibility.
Typo?, or you want to run the F17 pkg in F16?
Am 04.05.2012 10:38, schrieb Frank Murphy:
On 04/05/12 09:35, Jan Synacek wrote:
Hello list,
I'm looking for as many logwatch runs in Fedora 16 as possible. I need to test the F17 package so I know if there are any problems with compatibility.
Typo?, or you want to run the F17 pkg in F16?
what i generally not understand is why often if you report a bug for currently stable there are builds for F17/F18 and none for the release the bugs are reported as long no extra request
dear maintainers: please take a tighter look for which release bugs are reported and consider that the reporter has exactly this and only this version installed and is not very happy about a "has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17" notify without finding any build for the reported release on koji
Reindl Harald wrote:
dear maintainers: please take a tighter look for which release bugs are reported and consider that the reporter has exactly this and only this version installed and is not very happy about a "has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17" notify without finding any build for the reported release on koji
As long as the update for the other release does not close the BZ, I don't see anything wrong with the information about the update being posted there.
Michal
2012/5/4 Reindl Harald h.reindl@thelounge.net:
dear maintainers: please take a tighter look for which release bugs are reported and consider that the reporter has exactly this and only this version installed and is not very happy about a "has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17" notify without finding any build for the reported release on koji
See https://fedorahosted.org/bodhi/ticket/613 .
- Thomas
Am 04.05.2012 17:58, schrieb Thomas Moschny:
2012/5/4 Reindl Harald h.reindl@thelounge.net:
dear maintainers: please take a tighter look for which release bugs are reported and consider that the reporter has exactly this and only this version installed and is not very happy about a "has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17" notify without finding any build for the reported release on koji
that is not my point
my point is when i make a bugreport for F15/F16 why it is first built for F17, notified and a day later built for F16 (FAIR after a additional comment from me that i need a F16 build which does no longer appear)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806548#c46 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806548#c51
the reporter has usually not F17 in this case, so he can not confirm if this build will fix the problem and taking critical packages from koji does really not each reporter - please honor people who are doing
On Fri, 04 May 2012 18:07:04 +0200 Reindl Harald h.reindl@thelounge.net wrote:
that is not my point
my point is when i make a bugreport for F15/F16 why it is first built for F17, notified and a day later built for F16 (FAIR after a additional comment from me that i need a F16 build which does no longer appear)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806548#c46 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806548#c51
the reporter has usually not F17 in this case, so he can not confirm if this build will fix the problem and taking critical packages from koji does really not each reporter - please honor people who are doing
There may be any number of reasons for this:
* Maintainer is doing additional testing to make sure the update doesn't cause problems to the older stable release.
* Maintainer may be waiting for some additional patches/fixes to land so the update can include all of them as well as that fix.
* A new upstream release may be pending, and the maintainer may want to wait and push that.
I'd suggest being polite and understanding and simply note that you are still waiting for an update for an older release. There are sometimes good reasons not to simply push the same change to all branches and update them at the same time.
kevin
Am 04.05.2012 18:16, schrieb Kevin Fenzi:
On Fri, 04 May 2012 18:07:04 +0200 Reindl Harald h.reindl@thelounge.net wrote:
that is not my point
my point is when i make a bugreport for F15/F16 why it is first built for F17, notified and a day later built for F16
There may be any number of reasons for this:
Maintainer is doing additional testing to make sure the update doesn't cause problems to the older stable release.
Maintainer may be waiting for some additional patches/fixes to land so the update can include all of them as well as that fix.
A new upstream release may be pending, and the maintainer may want to wait and push that.
I'd suggest being polite and understanding and simply note that you are still waiting for an update for an older release. There are sometimes good reasons not to simply push the same change to all branches and update them at the same time.
i do not speak about pushig them to updates-testing or even stable i speak about "give me a koji-build which i can test"
in my opinion this is a big difference
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
Kevin DON'T PANIC
On Fri, 4 May 2012, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 04.05.2012 18:16, schrieb Kevin Fenzi:
On Fri, 04 May 2012 18:07:04 +0200 Reindl Harald h.reindl@thelounge.net wrote:
that is not my point
my point is when i make a bugreport for F15/F16 why it is first built for F17, notified and a day later built for F16
There may be any number of reasons for this:
Maintainer is doing additional testing to make sure the update doesn't cause problems to the older stable release.
Maintainer may be waiting for some additional patches/fixes to land so the update can include all of them as well as that fix.
A new upstream release may be pending, and the maintainer may want to wait and push that.
I'd suggest being polite and understanding and simply note that you are still waiting for an update for an older release. There are sometimes good reasons not to simply push the same change to all branches and update them at the same time.
i do not speak about pushig them to updates-testing or even stable i speak about "give me a koji-build which i can test"
in my opinion this is a big difference
Hi Jan:
I just ran this; what qualifies as an "unmatched entry"? How am I to spot one?
Richard
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Michal Schmidt mschmidt@redhat.com wrote:
Reindl Harald wrote:
i do not speak about pushig them to updates-testing or even stable i speak about "give me a koji-build which i can test"
Making the fix apply to the stable release often requires additional backporting effort.
Michal
devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
never-mind. I found them; I was just being lazy.
Jan: How do you want me to report these?
On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 8:36 PM, Richard Vickery <richard.vickeryrv@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Jan:
I just ran this; what qualifies as an "unmatched entry"? How am I to spot one?
Richard
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Michal Schmidt mschmidt@redhat.comwrote:
Reindl Harald wrote:
i do not speak about pushig them to updates-testing or even stable i speak about "give me a koji-build which i can test"
Making the fix apply to the stable release often requires additional backporting effort.
Michal
devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
--------------------- Selinux Audit Begin ------------------------
**Unmatched Entries** type=1131 audit(1335206040.736:102): pid=0 uid=0 auid=4294967295 ses=4294967295 subj=system_u:system_r:init_t:s0 msg=' comm="mcelog" exe="/bin/systemd" hostname=? addr=? terminal=? res=failed' type=1131 audit(1335805029.895:119): pid=0 uid=0 auid=4294967295 ses=4294967295 subj=system_u:system_r:init_t:s0 msg=' comm="mcelog" exe="/bin/systemd" hostname=? addr=? terminal=? res=failed'
---------------------- Selinux Audit End ------------------------- --------------------- Kernel Begin ------------------------
WARNING: Segmentation Faults in these executables Chrome_IOThread : 1 Time(s) abrt-applet : 1 Time(s) chrome : 6 Time(s) exe : 26 Time(s) gnomad2 : 2 Time(s) gnome-shell : 1 Time(s) nautilus : 2 Time(s) oyranos-policy : 1 Time(s) packagekitd : 4 Time(s) rhythmbox : 3 Time(s)
WARNING: Kernel Errors Present Buffer I/O error on device sdb1, ...: 46 Time(s) Buffer I/O error on device sdc1, ...: 1 Time(s) Buffer I/O error on device sdd1, ...: 10 Time(s) EXT4-fs (sdd1): previous I/O error to superblock de ...: 1 Time(s) EXT4-fs error (device sdd1): e ...: 2 Time(s) JBD2: Detected IO errors while flushing ...: 2 Time(s) JBD2: I/O error detected when up ...: 3 Time(s) end_request: I/O error, dev sdb, sector ...: 3 Time(s) end_request: I/O error, dev sdd, sector ...: 2 Time(s) iwl3945 0000:0c:00.0: Error removing station ...: 1 Time(s) iwl3945 0000:0c:00.0: Error sending C_LEDS: ...: 1 Time(s) iwl3945 0000:0c:00.0: Error sending C_QOS_PA ...: 1 Time(s) iwl3945 0000:0c:00.0: Error sending C_REM_ST ...: 1 Time(s) iwl3945 0000:0c:00.0: Error sending C_RXON: ...: 3 Time(s) iwl3945 0000:0c:00.0: Error sending C_RXON_A ...: 3 Time(s) iwl3945 0000:0c:00.0: Error setting new conf ...: 3 Time(s) journal commit I/O error ...: 8 Time(s) lost page write due to I/O error on sdb1 ...: 1 Time(s) lost page write due to I/O error on sdc1 ...: 1 Time(s) lost page write due to I/O error on sdd1 ...: 10 Time(s) scsi 5:0:0:0: [sdb] Unhandled error code ...: 1 Time(s) scsi 8:0:0:0: [sdb] Unhandled error code ...: 1 Time(s) scsi 9:0:0:0: [sdb] Unhandled error code ...: 1 Time(s) sd 6:0:0:0: [sdd] Unhandled error code ...: 2 Time(s) usb 2-3: device descriptor read/64, error -110 ...: 4 Time(s) usb 2-3: device descriptor read/8, error -110 ...: 4 Time(s) usb 6-1: device descriptor read/64, error -110 ...: 2 Time(s)
---------------------- Kernel End -------------------------
--------------------- pam_unix Begin ------------------------
gdm-password: Authentication Failures: richard: 10 Time(s)
gdm-welcome: Unknown Entries: session opened for user gdm by (uid=0): 64 Time(s) session closed for user gdm: 10 Time(s)
polkit-1: Unknown Entries: authentication failure; logname= uid=1000 euid=0 tty= ruser=richard rhost= user=richard: 1 Time(s)
preupgrade: Unknown Entries: authentication failure; logname=richard uid=1000 euid=0 tty=tty2 ruser=richard rhost= user=root: 1 Time(s)
su: Authentication Failures: richard(1000) -> root: 1 Time(s) Sessions Opened: richard -> root: 1 Time(s)
sudo: Authentication Failures: richard(1000) -> richard: 2 Time(s)
---------------------- pam_unix End -------------------------
--------------------- Connections (secure-log) Begin ------------------------
New Users: callweaver (987) mythtv (986) mysql (27)
Failed adding users: apache: 1 Time(s) amandabackup: 1 Time(s) mysql: 1 Time(s) icecast: 1 Time(s)
New Groups: callweaver (982) mythtv (981) mysql (27)
Added User to group: audio: mythtv video: mythtv
User Logins: richard : 2 Time(s)
Userhelper executed applications: richard -> poweroff as root: 53 Time(s) richard -> preupgrade as root: 3 Time(s) richard -> reboot as root: 4 Time(s)
**Unmatched Entries** gpasswd: user amandabackup added by root to group tape: 1 Time(s) kernel: Kernel logging (proc) stopped.: 3 Time(s) polkitd(authority=local): Operator of unix-session:/org/freedesktop/ConsoleKit/Session2 FAILED to authenticate to gain authorization for action org.freedesktop.packagekit.package-install for system-bus-name::1.88 [gpk-application] (owned by unix-user:richard): 1 Time(s) polkitd(authority=local): Operator of unix-session:/org/freedesktop/ConsoleKit/Session2 FAILED to authenticate to gain authorization for action org.freedesktop.packagekit.package-install-untrusted for system-bus-name::1.45 [/usr/libexec/gnome-settings-daemon] (owned by unix-user:richard): 2 Time(s) polkitd(authority=local): Operator of unix-session:/org/freedesktop/ConsoleKit/Session2 successfully authenticated as unix-user:richard to gain ONE-SHOT authorization for action org.freedesktop.packagekit.package-install-untrusted for system-bus-name::1.78 [gpk-application] (owned by unix-user:richard): 2 Time(s) polkitd(authority=local): Operator of unix-session:/org/freedesktop/ConsoleKit/Session2 successfully authenticated as unix-user:richard to gain ONE-SHOT authorization for action org.freedesktop.packagekit.package-install-untrusted for system-bus-name::1.95 [gpk-application] (owned by unix-user:richard): 1 Time(s) polkitd(authority=local): Operator of unix-session:/org/freedesktop/ConsoleKit/Session2 successfully authenticated as unix-user:richard to gain TEMPORARY authorization for action org.freedesktop.packagekit.package-install for system-bus-name::1.82 [gpk-application] (owned by unix-user:richard): 1 Time(s) polkitd(authority=local): Operator of unix-session:/org/freedesktop/ConsoleKit/Session2 successfully authenticated as unix-user:richard to gain TEMPORARY authorization for action org.freedesktop.packagekit.package-install for system-bus-name::1.88 [gpk-application] (owned by unix-user:richard): 11 Time(s) polkitd(authority=local): Operator of unix-session:/org/freedesktop/ConsoleKit/Session2 successfully authenticated as unix-user:richard to gain TEMPORARY authorization for action org.freedesktop.packagekit.package-install for system-bus-name::1.89 [gpk-application] (owned by unix-user:richard): 5 Time(s) polkitd(authority=local): Operator of unix-session:/org/freedesktop/ConsoleKit/Session4 FAILED to authenticate to gain authorization for action org.freedesktop.packagekit.package-install-untrusted for system-bus-name::1.130 [/usr/libexec/gnome-settings-daemon] (owned by unix-user:richard): 1 Time(s) rsyslogd: [origin software="rsyslogd" swVersion="5.8.7" x-pid="1088" x-info="http://www.rsyslog.com"] exiting on signal 15.: 1 Time(s) rsyslogd: [origin software="rsyslogd" swVersion="5.8.7" x-pid="1102" x-info="http://www.rsyslog.com"] exiting on signal 15.: 1 Time(s) usermod: add 'mythtv' to shadow group 'audio': 1 Time(s) usermod: add 'mythtv' to shadow group 'video': 1 Time(s)
---------------------- Connections (secure-log) End -------------------------
Glad I could help out, Jan! Of course, I will be getting a newer computer shortly, because this one is showing signs of ware.
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 10:49 PM, Jan Synacek jsynacek@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/05/12 at 08:46pm, Richard Vickery wrote:
--------------------- Selinux Audit Begin ------------------------
**Unmatched Entries**
<snip>
Thank you, Richard!
-- Jan Synacek Software Engineer, BaseOS team Brno, Red Hat -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 05/04/12 at 09:38am, Frank Murphy wrote:
On 04/05/12 09:35, Jan Synacek wrote:
Hello list,
I'm looking for as many logwatch runs in Fedora 16 as possible. I need to test the F17 package so I know if there are any problems with compatibility.
Typo?, or you want to run the F17 pkg in F16?
It's a noarch package and I want to update in F16 with the one that's currently in F17. It should be compatible and shouldn't break, but I wanted to check anyway.
On 04/05/12 10:47, Jan Synacek wrote:
On 05/04/12 at 09:38am, Frank Murphy wrote:
On 04/05/12 09:35, Jan Synacek wrote:
Hello list,
I'm looking for as many logwatch runs in Fedora 16 as possible. I need to test the F17 package so I know if there are any problems with compatibility.
Typo?, or you want to run the F17 pkg in F16?
It's a noarch package and I want to update in F16 with the one that's currently in F17. It should be compatible and shouldn't break, but I wanted to check anyway.
ok, will stick the result on fpaste, and reply with links.
Hi!
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 1:35 AM, Jan Synacek jsynacek@redhat.com wrote:
Hello list,
I'm looking for as many logwatch runs in Fedora 16 as possible. I need to test the F17 package so I know if there are any problems with compatibility.
Please, consider installing the new build [1], running it, sending me a logwatch report and possibly sending logs (obfuscated if need be) if there are any unmatched entries.
You can run logwatch like so: logwatch --range all --service all
[1] http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=317339
Thank you!
Here are all the sections I get with unmatched entries (running the provided build and logwatch command on F17): https://gist.github.com/2593451
Also, I get this at the top:
--------------------- System Configuration Begin ------------------------
No Sys::CPU module installed. To install, execute the command: perl -MCPAN -e 'install Sys::CPU'
No Sys::MemInfo module installed. To install, execute the command: perl -MCPAN -e 'install Sys::MemInfo'
Machine: x86_64 Release: Linux 3.3.4-1.fc17.x86_64
---------------------- System Configuration End -------------------------
Shouldn't logwatch have Requires on these modules?
-T.C.
On 05/04/2012 10:12 AM, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote:
Hi!
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 1:35 AM, Jan Synacekjsynacek@redhat.com wrote:
Hello list,
I'm looking for as many logwatch runs in Fedora 16 as possible. I need to test the F17 package so I know if there are any problems with compatibility.
Please, consider installing the new build [1], running it, sending me a logwatch report and possibly sending logs (obfuscated if need be) if there are any unmatched entries.
You can run logwatch like so: logwatch --range all --service all
[1] http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=317339
Thank you!
Here are all the sections I get with unmatched entries (running the provided build and logwatch command on F17): https://gist.github.com/2593451
Also, I get this at the top:
--------------------- System Configuration Begin ------------------------
No Sys::CPU module installed. To install, execute the command: perl -MCPAN -e 'install Sys::CPU'
No Sys::MemInfo module installed. To install, execute the command: perl -MCPAN -e 'install Sys::MemInfo'
Machine: x86_64 Release: Linux 3.3.4-1.fc17.x86_64
---------------------- System Configuration End -------------------------
Shouldn't logwatch have Requires on these modules?
I should think so but Sys::MemInfo isn't in Fedora yet.
Paul.
On 04/05/12 09:35, Jan Synacek wrote:
should last 24hrs
Am 04.05.2012 13:48, schrieb Frank Murphy:
On 04/05/12 09:35, Jan Synacek wrote:
should last 24hrs
http://fpaste.org/yH9I/ http://fpaste.org/aOLp/ http://fpaste.org/Lpbn/ http://fpaste.org/c9FR/
you noticed your "Date Range Processed: all"? _______________
call "/etc/cron.daily/0logwatch" which uses "/usr/share/logwatch/default.conf/logwatch.conf" and contains "Range = yesterday"
################### Logwatch 7.4.0 (03/01/11) #################### Processing Initiated: Fri May 4 13:18:24 2012 Date Range Processed: yesterday ( 2012-May-03 ) Period is day. Detail Level of Output: 0 Type of Output/Format: mail / text Logfiles for Host: mail.thelounge.net ##################################################################
On 04/05/12 12:54, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 04.05.2012 13:48, schrieb Frank Murphy:
On 04/05/12 09:35, Jan Synacek wrote:
should last 24hrs
http://fpaste.org/yH9I/ http://fpaste.org/aOLp/ http://fpaste.org/Lpbn/ http://fpaste.org/c9FR/
you noticed your "Date Range Processed: all"? _______________
And? to quote: You can run logwatch like so: logwatch --range all --service all
On 05/04/12 at 01:01pm, Frank Murphy wrote:
On 04/05/12 12:54, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 04.05.2012 13:48, schrieb Frank Murphy:
On 04/05/12 09:35, Jan Synacek wrote:
should last 24hrs
http://fpaste.org/yH9I/ http://fpaste.org/aOLp/ http://fpaste.org/Lpbn/ http://fpaste.org/c9FR/
you noticed your "Date Range Processed: all"? _______________
And? to quote: You can run logwatch like so: logwatch --range all --service all
Range all is perfectly fine - it processes all the logs, not just the ones from one day.
Thank you!
Am 04.05.2012 14:01, schrieb Frank Murphy:
On 04/05/12 12:54, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 04.05.2012 13:48, schrieb Frank Murphy:
On 04/05/12 09:35, Jan Synacek wrote:
should last 24hrs
http://fpaste.org/yH9I/ http://fpaste.org/aOLp/ http://fpaste.org/Lpbn/ http://fpaste.org/c9FR/
you noticed your "Date Range Processed: all"? _______________
And? to quote: You can run logwatch like so: logwatch --range all --service all
surely you can
but what did you like to tell us with "should last 24hrs" if you call it with "--range all"?