Porteus-v5.0x86_64_bugs reports

Please reproduce your error on a second machine before posting, and check the error by running without saved changes or extra modules (See FAQ No. 13, "How to report a bug"). For unstable Porteus versions (alpha, beta, rc) please use the relevant thread in our "Development" section.
User avatar
Rava
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 5401
Joined: 11 Jan 2011, 02:46
Distribution: XFCE 5.01 x86_64 + 4.0 i586
Location: Forests of Germany

Porteus-v5.0x86_64_bugs reports

Post#166 by Rava » 11 Oct 2022, 07:50

@rych
It seems at least http://ftp.nluug.nl/os/Linux/distr/porteus/ and http://ftp.vim.org/ftp/os/Linux/distr/porteus/ are both lacking the needed x86_64/Porteus-v5.0/updates/core/YYYYMMDD/ folders
See my 2 posts on the bottom of page 11 in this thread about my manually downloading the updates via wget -r , but from the 3rd fastest server for me, which is http://www.mirrorservice.org/sites/dl.porteus.org/

Added in 2 minutes 52 seconds:
After cleaning up the folder hierarchy the "wget -r" created and moving files to where I want them I ended up with these

Code: Select all

guest@porteus:/mybin/linux/porteus/5.0/x86-64/updates_core/20220924$ ls -o *xzm
-rwxrwxrwx 1 guest 127279104 2022-10-09 12:48 001-core.xzm
-rwxrwxrwx 1 guest 116957184 2022-10-09 12:48 002-xorg.xzm
-rwxrwxrwx 1 guest  25645056 2022-10-09 12:48 003-cinnamon.xzm
-rwxrwxrwx 1 guest  23937024 2022-10-09 12:48 003-gnome.xzm
-rwxrwxrwx 1 guest  87158784 2022-10-09 12:48 003-kde5.xzm
-rwxrwxrwx 1 guest   9560064 2022-10-09 12:48 003-lxde.xzm
-rwxrwxrwx 1 guest  23232512 2022-10-09 12:48 003-lxqt.xzm
-rwxrwxrwx 1 guest  16613376 2022-10-09 12:48 003-mate.xzm
-rwxrwxrwx 1 guest   4554752 2022-10-09 12:48 003-openbox.xzm
-rwxrwxrwx 1 guest  14422016 2022-10-09 12:48 003-xfce.xzm
Added in 1 minute 16 seconds:
Do not ask me why the folder is called 20220924 but the files themselves are 2022-10-09
Cheers!
Yours Rava

User avatar
ncmprhnsbl
DEV Team
DEV Team
Posts: 3924
Joined: 20 Mar 2012, 03:42
Distribution: v5.0-64bit
Location: australia
Contact:

Porteus-v5.0x86_64_bugs reports

Post#167 by ncmprhnsbl » 11 Oct 2022, 07:56

@Rava
yes, there are some issues with some mirrors not syncing correctly.. it will take some time to fix.
other than the updater, the simplest way to get these updates would be to use a web browser.(at least to check whether the updates are present(most are ok))
the issue you're getting with "[ERROR] An internet connection is required." is not something i've encountered, something peculiar to your setup.. ?
when i had this false case in the past elsewhere, i think it was firewall related.. ..i don't quite recall.
the script calls this function (in /usr/share/porteus/porteus-functions) :

Code: Select all

is_online(){ ping -q -w 1 -c 1 `ip r | awk '/default/{print$3}'|head -n1` >/dev/null 2>&1; }
Forum Rules : https://forum.porteus.org/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=44

User avatar
Rava
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 5401
Joined: 11 Jan 2011, 02:46
Distribution: XFCE 5.01 x86_64 + 4.0 i586
Location: Forests of Germany

Porteus-v5.0x86_64_bugs reports

Post#168 by Rava » 11 Oct 2022, 08:03

ncmprhnsbl wrote:
11 Oct 2022, 07:56
when i had this false case in the past elsewhere, i think it was firewall related.. ..i don't quite recall.
That could be it, I use the standard setup but opened 2 more ports for interlink:
from my /etc/rc.d/rc.FireWall

Code: Select all

## ## 587: SMTP - 993: SSL IMAP
ALLOWED_PORTS="20 21 22 25 80 110 143 443 587 993"
Could it be you changed your current firefall?
________________________________________________

IMPORTANT UPDATE
I kept the tab with the wget -r as mentioned above open… and only realized it started downloading all other folders as well.
So just using "wget -r" is not recommended at all, you have to specify the maximum recursion depth as well… no time to test that out for you, better either find a post on here that explains it or somewhere on the intertubes like a "wget linux HOW-TO recurse downloading".

Code: Select all

  -l,  --level=NUMBER              maximum recursion depth (inf or 0 for infinite)
Last edited by Rava on 11 Oct 2022, 08:08, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Dr. Copy and Mr. Paste strikes again…
Cheers!
Yours Rava

User avatar
ncmprhnsbl
DEV Team
DEV Team
Posts: 3924
Joined: 20 Mar 2012, 03:42
Distribution: v5.0-64bit
Location: australia
Contact:

Porteus-v5.0x86_64_bugs reports

Post#169 by ncmprhnsbl » 11 Oct 2022, 08:13

Rava wrote:
11 Oct 2022, 08:03
Could it be you changed your current firefall?
my tests were in vbox likely with no firewall at all.
Forum Rules : https://forum.porteus.org/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=44

User avatar
Rava
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 5401
Joined: 11 Jan 2011, 02:46
Distribution: XFCE 5.01 x86_64 + 4.0 i586
Location: Forests of Germany

Porteus-v5.0x86_64_bugs reports

Post#170 by Rava » 11 Oct 2022, 08:15

With firewall running:

Code: Select all

root@porteus:~# is_online(){ ping -q -w 1 -c 1 `ip r | awk '/default/{print$3}'|head -n1` >/dev/null 2>&1; }
root@porteus:~# is_online 
root@porteus:~# echo $?
1
:(
Cheers!
Yours Rava

User avatar
ncmprhnsbl
DEV Team
DEV Team
Posts: 3924
Joined: 20 Mar 2012, 03:42
Distribution: v5.0-64bit
Location: australia
Contact:

Porteus-v5.0x86_64_bugs reports

Post#171 by ncmprhnsbl » 11 Oct 2022, 08:16

running just this might give more info:

Code: Select all

ping -q -w 1 -c 1 `ip r | awk '/default/{print$3}'|head -n1`
Forum Rules : https://forum.porteus.org/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=44

User avatar
Rava
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 5401
Joined: 11 Jan 2011, 02:46
Distribution: XFCE 5.01 x86_64 + 4.0 i586
Location: Forests of Germany

Porteus-v5.0x86_64_bugs reports

Post#172 by Rava » 11 Oct 2022, 08:17

^
I was just on it when you beat me to the punch:

Without the >/dev/null 2>&1

Code: Select all

root@porteus:~# ping -q -w 1 -c 1 `ip r | awk '/default/{print$3}'|head -n1`
PING 10.42.0.1 (10.42.0.1) 56(84) bytes of data.

--- 10.42.0.1 ping statistics ---
1 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 0ms
But my firewall doesn't block ping per se since ping Gøøgle works:

Code: Select all

root@porteus:~# ping -q -w 1 -c 1 google.com
PING google.com (172.217.16.78) 56(84) bytes of data.

--- google.com ping statistics ---
1 packets transmitted, 1 received, 0% packet loss, time 0ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 40.999/40.999/40.999/0.000 ms
root@porteus:~# echo $?
0
Weird, why does one ping work and the one from is_online not?

Added in 8 minutes 26 seconds:
Could it be because my x86-64 Port5.0 gets its internet via LAN from my i586Port4.0 via NetworkManager WLAN over LAN sharing?
As in the i586Port4.0 gets WLAN since its WLAN card is working with Linux
and my main machine x86-64-Port5.0 is connected via LAN to the i586Port4.0 system, because x86-64-Port5.0 uses one of these WLAN cards that fail with Linux.

Or could it be the rc.FireWall from my i586Port4.0 system that blocks the ping?
Or is there no answer since my i586Port4.0 system is no server but a mere desktop system running NetworkManager?
Cheers!
Yours Rava

Testuser
Samurai
Samurai
Posts: 137
Joined: 26 May 2021, 15:11
Distribution: Porteus-v5.0-64-LXDE

Porteus-v5.0x86_64_bugs reports

Post#173 by Testuser » 11 Oct 2022, 17:42

ncmprhnsbl wrote:
11 Oct 2022, 00:55
i have a usb (hard)drive that also doesn't powerdown and i've always just unplugged it(after unmount), with no apparent harm.. perhaps i'm wrong to do so..
You are right Ncmp we can unplug once unmounted. :good: But powering off is a little bit extra care. :)

User avatar
Rava
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 5401
Joined: 11 Jan 2011, 02:46
Distribution: XFCE 5.01 x86_64 + 4.0 i586
Location: Forests of Germany

Porteus-v5.0x86_64_bugs reports

Post#174 by Rava » 11 Oct 2022, 18:08

ncmprhnsbl wrote:
11 Oct 2022, 00:55
i have a usb (hard)drive that also doesn't powerdown and i've always just unplugged it(after unmount), with no apparent harm.. perhaps i'm wrong to do so..
I presume it must be one of the small ones with the "notebook sized" hardrive inside, and not a harddrive of 3.5" format (all 3.5" external harddrives I ever saw needed external power) - then no worries. These are more robust than the large ones and are build to be powered off more … abrupt … than the desktop or the server ones.
As long as you not kick or shake it when you unplug the USB cable, no harm will befall your drive.
Cheers!
Yours Rava

User avatar
Rava
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 5401
Joined: 11 Jan 2011, 02:46
Distribution: XFCE 5.01 x86_64 + 4.0 i586
Location: Forests of Germany

Porteus-v5.0x86_64_bugs reports

Post#175 by Rava » 12 Oct 2022, 17:31

@ncmprhnsbl

Code: Select all

root@porteus:/# ping -q -w 1 -c 1 google.de
PING google.de (142.251.209.131) 56(84) bytes of data.

--- google.de ping statistics ---
1 packets transmitted, 1 received, 0% packet loss, time 0ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 40.947/40.947/40.947/0.000 ms

root@porteus:/# ping -q -w 1 -c 1 ard.de
PING ard.de (34.120.237.106) 56(84) bytes of data.

--- ard.de ping statistics ---
1 packets transmitted, 1 received, 0% packet loss, time 0ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 27.217/27.217/27.217/0.000 ms

root@porteus:/# ping -q -w 1 -c 1 `ip r | awk '/default/{print$3}'|head -n1`
PING 10.42.0.1 (10.42.0.1) 56(84) bytes of data.

--- 10.42.0.1 ping statistics ---
1 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 0ms
Since some random pings to internet sites work and the sans 2>/dev/null from is_online() never works for me, I presume it is because on that main machine I have a LAN connection to the i586 Port 4.0 one who shares its WLAN via LAN / NetworkManager - therefore the address of 10.42.0.1

What are your thoughts on that ncmprhnsbl?

How can it be fixed so that others who also use WLAN over LAN sharing get is_online() report a success - or do we need to hack is_online() into

Code: Select all

is_online(){ ping -q -w 1 -c 1 google.com >/dev/null 2>&1; }
because hacked like that it works:

Code: Select all

root@porteus:/# is_online(){ ping -q -w 1 -c 1 google.com >/dev/null 2>&1; }
root@porteus:/# is_online 
root@porteus:/# echo $?
0
Cheers!
Yours Rava

User avatar
Ed_P
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 8341
Joined: 06 Feb 2013, 22:12
Distribution: Cinnamon 5.01 ISO
Location: Western NY, USA

Porteus-v5.0x86_64_bugs reports

Post#176 by Ed_P » 14 Oct 2022, 16:31

Ed_P wrote:
11 Oct 2022, 03:55
Unfortunately Porteus Setting Centre > Porteus Update doesn't work for those of us booting the Porteus ISOs. No indication there are updates, no list of updates, no info about what, why, when, who, etc.
A problem for a long time.
johnywhy wrote:
31 Aug 2018, 00:55
i found out i cannot apply Porteus updates to an iso boot.
Any workaround?
Ed

User avatar
Rava
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 5401
Joined: 11 Jan 2011, 02:46
Distribution: XFCE 5.01 x86_64 + 4.0 i586
Location: Forests of Germany

Porteus-v5.0x86_64_bugs reports

Post#177 by Rava » 14 Oct 2022, 18:13

^ & this:
johnywhy wrote:
31 Aug 2018, 00:55
i found out i cannot apply Porteus updates to an iso boot.
Any workaround?
Manually updating an ISO, as in: replacing all files that are updated with newer versions and create a new ISO out of that would work.

Not that I do so, I prefer the extracted modules, gives me much more flexibility, and especially when working with symlinks it saves a lot of disk space on my boot partition of sda1.
With me having 19 Porteus folders alone (and 3 other Linux) on my sda1 that only has 1.5 GB would not be possible when I used ISOs for each of the 19 variants of Porteus.
Cheers!
Yours Rava

User avatar
Ed_P
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 8341
Joined: 06 Feb 2013, 22:12
Distribution: Cinnamon 5.01 ISO
Location: Western NY, USA

Porteus-v5.0x86_64_bugs reports

Post#178 by Ed_P » 15 Oct 2022, 06:09

Rava wrote:
14 Oct 2022, 18:13
Manually updating an ISO, as in: replacing all files that are updated with newer versions and create a new ISO out of that would work.
Easier to just load the update file/files to the Porteus extramod= folder. But that is difficult to do if the user doesn't know what got updated and why. The Porteus Update shortcoming needs to be addressed, not to do the update but to inform All users what was updated and why so the users can decide what to do about the updates.
Rava wrote:
14 Oct 2022, 18:13
not be possible when I used ISOs for each of the 19 variants of Porteus.
1 ISO, 1 Modules folder, 19 boot menus would be less space. This is one of my grub2 menuentries.

Code: Select all

     set linux_folder=/porteus5.0
#     set iso="/ISOs/Porteus-CINNAMON-v5.0rc1-86_64.iso"
#     set iso="/ISOs/Porteus-CINNAMON-v5.0rc2-86_64.iso"
#     set iso="/ISOs/Porteus-CINNAMON-v5.0rc3-x86_64.iso"
#     set iso="/porteus5.0/rc3ISOModules/Porteus-CINNAMON-v5.0rc3-x86_64-20220617-5.18.5.iso"
     set iso="/ISOs/Porteus-CINNAMON-v5.0-x86_64-220723.iso"
 :
 :
 
menuentry " Porteus 5.0 ISO - AF'"  --class slackware   --class icon-porteus  {

     set bootparms="volume=33 reboot=cold extramod=$linux_folder/Modules noload=kde;jinn;lxqt;xfce;lxde;mate;open;50save" # ;mychanges"

     search -f $iso --set=root
     loopback loop $iso
     linux (loop)/boot/syslinux/vmlinuz from=$iso $bootparms
#     linux $linux_folder/BootModules/vmlinuz from=$iso $bootparms
     initrd (loop)/boot/syslinux/initrd.xz
#     initrd $linux_folder/initrd/initrd.xz  
     }
Ed

User avatar
Rava
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 5401
Joined: 11 Jan 2011, 02:46
Distribution: XFCE 5.01 x86_64 + 4.0 i586
Location: Forests of Germany

Porteus-v5.0x86_64_bugs reports

Post#179 by Rava » 15 Oct 2022, 06:33

Ed_P wrote:
15 Oct 2022, 06:09
[T]hat is difficult to do if the user doesn't know what got updated and why. The Porteus Update shortcoming needs to be addressed, not to do the update but to inform All users what was updated and why so the users can decide what to do about the updates.
I agree…
Ed_P wrote:
15 Oct 2022, 06:09
1 ISO, 1 Modules folder, 19 boot menus would be less space.
Not really, since almost all xzm's in my 19 boot folders are symlinks, some to sda1, but others to sda? that is not sda1.
Only very few that I use in almost all my variants are actual files sitting in sda1 - e.g. the ones needed to have my nvidia driver for older hardware running:

Code: Select all

guest@porteus:/mnt/sda1/Porteus_5.0a/porteus/base$ ls -o 000* 010*|cut -c 19-
68694016 2020-04-04 22:29 000-kernel5.4.30.xzm
42328064 2020-04-09 21:27 010-nvidia-340.108-k.5.4.30-porteus-v5.0-x86_64_rava.xzm
Cheers!
Yours Rava

User avatar
ncmprhnsbl
DEV Team
DEV Team
Posts: 3924
Joined: 20 Mar 2012, 03:42
Distribution: v5.0-64bit
Location: australia
Contact:

Porteus-v5.0x86_64_bugs reports

Post#180 by ncmprhnsbl » 30 Oct 2022, 07:24

here is a module of an adjusted /opt/porteus-scripts/update-porteus
edit:see here: Porteus-v5.0x86_64_bugs reports (Post by ncmprhnsbl #91204)
to test it, just activate and run the updater from porteus settings centre.
changes should now allow showing and downloading(to somewhere of your choice) updates while booting from an ISO or other nonwritable media.
please test.
Forum Rules : https://forum.porteus.org/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=44

Post Reply