After a recent flashing of my L5, this is not an issue anymore.
Thu, Apr 22
the problem still persists on my Librem 5. I cannot download updates for tzdata and certificates
@guido here, and thanks for the link:
@joao.azevedo can you provide a backtrace: https://developer.puri.sm/Librem5/Development_Environment/Boards/Troubleshooting/Debugging.html?highlight=gdb#finding-core-dumps https://developer.puri.sm/Librem5/Development_Environment/Boards/Troubleshooting/Debugging.html?highlight=gdb#finding-core-dumps - otherwise the segfault says almost nothing about where the problem is happening.
Wed, Apr 21
Tue, Apr 20
I'm sorry, we don't support any hardware that requires proprietary firmware. Your best bet is to install and use Debian with non-free repo enabled.
This is unsupported hardware, you probably need proprietary firmware for nouveau driver...
How i can do it? Please, send link to instruction or something
This is unsupported hardware, you probably need proprietary firmware for nouveau driver...
Mon, Apr 19
updated, so closing
Sun, Apr 18
Sat, Apr 17
So, that RST packet is indeed the issue, and there's a high chance that either APT or GnuTLS don't handle this correctly. I talked with an APT developer, and we may actually need to debug this further in future.
In the meanwhile though, the issue can be mitigated by throwing an Apache2 webserver in front as proxy, instead of Nginx.
Fri, Apr 16
Some new observations:
- This is not a proxy server issue: Even without proxy, the issue occurs
- The TLS version doesn't matter at all
- Before the issue occurs, we get quite a few TCP retransmissions from the client to the server, and then the current connection is dropped:
- There is nothing suspicious in the Nginx logs, not even at info priority. A quick glance at the debug logs also didn't show anything interesting, but those are massive and it's possible that I missed something.
@guido Yes, okay to update. I'll do it unless you get to it first.
Then let's go with g) until / unless we determine this is unsuitable. It may lead to tags like "fixed in Byzantium" or "fixed in Amber" but those ought to be easily managed and I think we already have a "fixed in Byzantium" tag.
Thu, Apr 15
to me that sounds like there is no bug in the matrix-mirage package but instead a bug in the setup of the environment.
In the field of voodoo magic:
@jonas.smedegaard since you packaged matrix-mirage you might be curious about this "bug".
Wed, Apr 14
Upstream issue: https://gitlab.gnome.org/World/lollypop/-/issues/2768
[DEBUG] 2021-04-14 13:40:24 Importing audio file:///home/joao/Music/fuck\ it-jZIoxw0ca9E.mp4
[DEBUG] 2021-04-14 13:40:24 LazyLoadingView::lazy_loading(): 0.33496856689453125
Tue, Apr 13
This package version is found in Debian experimental: https://packages.debian.org/experimental/network-manager-openvpn
@sebastian.krzyszkowiak I am not aware, I could not find anything on their bug tracker. But this issue has been fixed with https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/NetworkManager-openvpn/-/merge_requests/34 and it seems that version with the fix, v1.8.14, is released already.
We're using network-manager-openvpn from Debian - is there an issue for that in Debian's bugtracker?
Mon, Apr 12
@jonas.smedegaard I am not sure.
perhaps this? https://gitlab.gnome.org/World/lollypop/-/issues/2745
I meant T1024.
@jeremiah.foster o.k. to update the docs?
Le't leave it as is then for now (since this seems current PureOS practice):
Strictly speaking, this issue is about Maintainer field. T1023 was about Vcs-* fields.
Two more questions:
having the these texts in a form that is suitable for c'n'p would help:
Concretetely, I popose to replace this:
Sun, Apr 11
The Debian bugtracker has a similar task of tracking issues potentially tied to multiple distro releases, and handles that like g).
Sat, Apr 10
Taking T1027 as an example, I see several options here:
a) we track code project source: issue is done when solved at the code source of what is being packaged
b) we track code project release: issue is done when solved at the code source of what is being packaged and released (e.g. as tarball or git tag)
c) we track packaging project source: issue is done when solved at the packaging source
d) we track packaging project release: issue is done when solved at the packaging source and released (i.e. git tag and pushed to any queue)
e) we track any distribution: issue is done when package is available in any suite (e.g. landing)
f) we track development distribution: issue is done when package is available in testing suite (i.e. currently byzantium)
g) we track all distributions: issue is done when package is available in all supported suites (i.e. currently amber and byzantium)
h) we require explicitly defined scope: issue can only be done when clarified in issue itself where it is considered done.
@jeremiah.foster I think this issue is making good progress but still not resolved: Packaging Overview now properly covers requirement to add maintainer address, but lack the detail of preserving older Maintainer field.
It is now 13 days without migration - seems from https://master.pureos.net/migrations/excuse/6e70e037-1095-4e56-acae-4e854767fb5b that it "just" needs to be built on arm64.
Thanks, @alexander.mikhaylenko, the pending changes look good to me.
hmm - let's try see if status "incomplete" is something similar to "pending" - i.e. appears as open but distinct from "Normal"...
...and thanks for working towards solving this issue.
This issue tracker tracks development of packages, whereas https://source.puri.sm/ tracks development of code projects (often used as basis for packages).
Apr 8 2021
@ezs777 thanks for confirming it works for you!
This was fixed when the latest update of nautilus, which I applied this morning.
Apr 7 2021
Apr 6 2021
Architecturally this should actually be implemented in such a way that a bugtracker change emits a new message on Laniakea's ZeroMQ-based message-bus, and that message is then picked up by the Matrix bot and relayed to the channel
that way, other consumers can pick up the messages as well and act on them for other purposes than showing a channel message (that's how automatic bug closing was implemented in the past, actually)
(but "in the past" means deep in the past where Trac was used for bugtracking)
The messages Laniakea sends are multipart-ZeroMQ messages with a header/subject in rDNS form, like _lk.archive.new-package and a JSON body with a few standardized fields and one freeform "data" part. The JSON part is signed with an Ed25519 signature from the messaging relay, so messages can be authenticated as correct
(message submission happens via a Curve25519-encrypted connection to a relay, from where they are distributed to interested parties)
and yes, this should absolutely be documented properly ;-)
Fortunately, the Laniakea Python module has helpers for this stuff so you don't have to touch it directly - in theory all this needs is a consumer of bug tracker events that submits them to the relay, and then the Matrix bot only needs to be told how to convert the messages into human-readable form
https://github.com/lkhq/laniakea/tree/master/src/mirk is the tool we use to push to Matrix.
With which version of openvpn? Some of the links you provided indicated older versions of openvpn were the issue, we have a newer version in Byzantium now.
@jeremiah.foster We already reproduced the issue with Librem Tunnel.
Apr 5 2021
I guess the next step is to try to reproduce with Librem Tunnel.
In Byzantium, I see openvpn at version 2.5.1-1. I created a new Purist openvpn certificate, loaded that cert into Network Manager, and as expected received the tun0 interface. I then used the browser to determine my IP and the browser returned 'Your IP address is in Gunzenhausen, Bayern, Germany (91710)' which is the end point of the VPN apparently because normally my address is in Oakville, Connecticut, United States (06779).
As I mentioned before, I did update all my packages before testing it again, and I got the same error. I did find a StackOverflow post with a similar workaround, but I didn't want to do that, if a regular bugfix or update was going to resolve it.
Did you update system?
Apr 4 2021
Glad to hear you got it up an running!
Apr 3 2021
I've successfully been able to install PureOS 10, so this issue can be closed. It might be helpful to provide this information to new users of the Librem Mini (and possibly the Librem 14), so they don't run into the same issue.
Apr 2 2021
I actually got it to run with Debian Bullseye, so I'm guessing that the kernel was the reason. I'll try with Byzantium, and report back, and if all goes well, this issue can be closed.
Mar 31 2021
I still get this in Byzantium;
You'll need a recent kernel which is why Amber won't run - I'm using 5.10.0-4-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 5.10.19-1 (2021-03-02) x86_64 GNU/Linux but I'm surprised the one from the OEM ISO didn't work for you. Did you use this to install: http://downloads.pureos.net/byzantium/gnome-oem/2020-11-20/?
Mar 30 2021
I tested this in a Byzantium image in Boxes. It worked, I was able o change the disk encryption passphrase twice on the same VM.
Mar 29 2021
Mar 28 2021
Upstream bug fixed.
@jeremiah.foster I am running Plymouth version 0.9.5-2pureos1. This is on a Librem 13 v3 running Byzantium.
Mar 27 2021
The (supported) way to install Kodi on PureOS is to use the package which is part of PureOS, *not* use external packages from Ubuntu or elsewhere.
This issue should be fixed since release 2:19.0+dfsg1-1pureos1 of kodi, which should appear in Debian Byzantium within a week.
Mar 26 2021
Which hardware? Which version of plymouth? Amber or Byzantium?
Added to debian/control file, patch merged.