Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fedora security updates only on newer releases

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • agillis
    replied
    Originally posted by garym View Post
    Shouldn't need to login to make VB startup. It should just start upon reboot. p.s. I wouldn't do this upgrade to fedora 25 unless I really knew what I was doing. It's not clear to me that anyone has that fully working. It's certainly not released yet by Andrew.
    VortexBox 2.5 is released as a BETA. It should be working OK.

    Leave a comment:


  • sbmocp
    replied
    Originally posted by garym View Post
    Shouldn't need to login to make VB startup. It should just start upon reboot. p.s. I wouldn't do this upgrade to fedora 25 unless I really knew what I was doing. It's not clear to me that anyone has that fully working. It's certainly not released yet by Andrew.
    Okay. I'll do a stock re-install then. I'd hoped to get a little closer to a more "modern" system environment before starting, but that'll have to wait. Thanks!

    Leave a comment:


  • garym
    replied
    Shouldn't need to login to make VB startup. It should just start upon reboot. p.s. I wouldn't do this upgrade to fedora 25 unless I really knew what I was doing. It's not clear to me that anyone has that fully working. It's certainly not released yet by Andrew.

    Leave a comment:


  • sbmocp
    replied
    Originally posted by garyirwin View Post
    Hi I tried:

    dnf -y system-upgrade download --releasever=25 --nogpgcheck --allowerasing

    I should point out I have no idea what I am doing I just want vortexbox to work on a newer nuc. The above at least has allowed me to proceed to the reboot bit and the install is happening now.

    Proceed at your own risk, I don't know if its bad or not lol
    I just performed a fresh install on an older machine for my first Vortexbox ever. Got the same errors you did. Then tried the install using your command above and the install completed. Being new to this, though, I'm not sure everything's working.

    I am presented with a login prompt on bootup and login as root. Then I'm left at a commandline. Should Vortexbox just start up after a login?

    Leave a comment:


  • garyirwin
    replied
    Alas when I put the drive in my new nuc, still no dice. The new nuc does not support legacy boot.

    Major disappointment I guess my search for the ideal server continues.

    Leave a comment:


  • garyirwin
    replied
    Hi I tried:

    dnf -y system-upgrade download --releasever=25 --nogpgcheck --allowerasing

    I should point out I have no idea what I am doing I just want vortexbox to work on a newer nuc. The above at least has allowed me to proceed to the reboot bit and the install is happening now.

    Proceed at your own risk, I don't know if its bad or not lol

    Leave a comment:


  • SeanMiddleton
    replied
    Originally posted by lucaberta View Post

    looks like you are missing a GPG key to validate the integrity of the package file, and thus the installation fails.

    At the Fedora Linux CLI, try giving this command:

    Code:
    sudo rpm --import https://getfedora.org/static/FDB19C98.txt
    That should import the right key and allow for the installation to happen.

    Let me know if this fixes the issue.

    Bye, Luca
    Hi Lucaberta
    I tried your command but still not workgin. Pasted below the screen dialogue:
    warning: /var/lib/dnf/system-upgrade/twolame-libs-0.3.13-5.fc25.x86_64.rpm: Header V4 RSA/SHA1 Signature, key ID 6806a9cb: NOKEY
    Importing GPG key 0xB7546F06:
    Userid : "RPM Fusion free repository for Fedora (24) <[email protected]>"
    Fingerprint: 55E7 903B 6087 98E4 EC78 64CD 9F63 8721 B754 6F06 From : /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-rpmfusion-free-fedora-25
    Is this ok [y/N]: y Key imported successfully
    Import of key(s) didn't help, wrong key(s)?
    The downloaded packages were saved in cache until the next successful transaction.
    You can remove cached packages by executing 'dnf clean packages'.
    Error:


    Public key for twolame-libs-0.3.13-5.fc25.x86_64.rpm is not installedFailing package is: twolame-libs-0.3.13-5.fc25.x86_64
    GPG Keys are configured as: file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-rpmfusion-free-fedora-25

    [[email protected] ~]# sudo rpm --import https://getfedora.org/static/FDB19C98.txt
    [[email protected] ~]# [[email protected] ~]#
    [[email protected] ~]#
    [[email protected] ~]# [[email protected] ~]# dnf system-upgrade --refresh --releasever=25 [NOTE I had earlier retried this with the --download option]
    Mini usage:

    system-upgrade [OPTIONS] [download --releasever=VERSION|reboot|clean|log]

    Prepare system for upgrade to a new release
    alias: fedup
    [[email protected] ~]# dnf system-upgrade reboot
    Error: system is not ready for upgrade

    This problem seems to exist for other users. See http://kwlug.org/pipermail/kwlug-dis...ly/065033.html


    Its very strange
    Last edited by SeanMiddleton; 01-13-2019, 01:44 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • lucaberta
    replied
    Originally posted by SeanMiddleton View Post
    Curl error (37): Couldn't read a file:// file for file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-25-x86_64 [Couldn't open file /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-25-x86_64]
    warning: /var/lib/dnf/system-upgrade/mpg123-libs-1.25.6-1.fc25.x86_64.rpm: Header V3 RSA/SHA256 Signature, key ID fdb19c98: NOKEY[/I][/INDENT]

    Any ideas what the problem is ??
    looks like you are missing a GPG key to validate the integrity of the package file, and thus the installation fails.

    At the Fedora Linux CLI, try giving this command:

    Code:
    sudo rpm --import https://getfedora.org/static/FDB19C98.txt
    That should import the right key and allow for the installation to happen.

    Let me know if this fixes the issue.

    Bye, Luca

    Leave a comment:


  • SeanMiddleton
    replied
    Originally posted by Arcticpollen View Post
    Interesting thread...

    As my attempt to run VB2.4 on my existing hardware last weekend resulted in no sound through the USB DAC on my Oppo BDP, I thought that there was not much to lose by trying the Fedora upgrade method that Lucaberta linked to above. I thought I'd try an slightly incremental approach and go to Fedora 25 rather than trying to go straight to 27 using: -

    Code:
    dnf install dnf-plugin-system-upgrade
    Code:
    dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=25
    Code:
    dnf system-upgrade reboot
    Having attached a monitor to the host so I could keep an eye in the upgrade progress, I was quite suprised to see one of the packages listed as Vortexbox 2.5.1 being installed.

    Following the reboot, the system came straight back up and it has cured my playback issue and shows the following: -

    Click image for larger version Name:	VB_Capture.JPG Views:	1 Size:	91.7 KB ID:	1434

    I will have a play and see what is or isn't working so far...
    I executed the commands given in post £11 but after the second command and the download of all the Fedora 25 packages I received the following message when I selected 'yes' to perform the upgrade:

    You can remove cached packages by executing 'dnf clean packages'.
    The downloaded packages were saved in cache until the next successful transaction.
    Curl error (37): Couldn't read a file:// file for file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-25-x86_64 [Couldn't open file /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-25-x86_64]
    warning: /var/lib/dnf/system-upgrade/mpg123-libs-1.25.6-1.fc25.x86_64.rpm: Header V3 RSA/SHA256 Signature, key ID fdb19c98: NOKEY

    Any ideas what the problem is ??

    Sean

    Leave a comment:


  • lucaberta
    replied
    Originally posted by Wirrunna View Post
    It's not just the Fedora security updates that need a later version than Fedora 23, attempting a manual upgrade of Plex (https://www.plex.tv/media-server-downloads/) and selecting Linux showed "Fedora 64-bit (RPM for Fedora 24 or newer)"
    That is bizarre, Wirrunna, as I have been able to update Plex on my Fedora 23 machine for a few years now, without any problems.

    Granted, I do this by hand from the command line, doing a wget of the new rpm file and then dnf install, and I have never had problems during the upgrade.

    The one issue I have is the fact that Plex does not restart automatically after the upgrade, but a simple:

    Code:
    systemsctl restart plexmediaserver
    fixes things straight from the CLI, without the need to reboot.

    Bye, Luca

    Leave a comment:


  • Wirrunna
    replied
    It's not just the Fedora security updates that need a later version than Fedora 23, attempting a manual upgrade of Plex (https://www.plex.tv/media-server-downloads/) and selecting Linux showed "Fedora 64-bit (RPM for Fedora 24 or newer)"

    Leave a comment:


  • davem
    replied
    Originally posted by agillis View Post
    New update coming. meltdown and spectre require special code to be run on the box. This is virtually impossible on a headless box with no desktop. So we are safe for now.
    Andrew,

    Any timeframe on when this update will be available ? I know that as soon as I update from 2.3 to 2.4 then 2.5 will be released...

    Leave a comment:


  • Transporter
    replied
    Question: Has anybody tried this procedure with a VBA 2.3 box? The only reason I ask is that I have one older 64 bit NUC that runs VBA 2.3 fine but no matter what I do, I can't load VBA 2.4 on it. It goes through all the motions, I get finished and get to reboot, and it attempts to boot from Network because it now doesn't see any hard drive. When I go into BIOS, the hard drive is there in Devices, but no hard drive is listed in either the UEFI or Legacy sections for Boot Order.

    If going from 2.3 to 2.5 is absolutely impossible, any suggestion on why the 2TB main drive disappears after attempting a 2.4 Build?

    Leave a comment:


  • Arcticpollen
    replied
    One of the issues with the currently available Fedora 23 and VB 2.4 setup routines available are a lack of support for newer chipset motherboards. I was unable to do a clean install of these versions after buying a new Apollo Lake board from ASRock. Doing a clean installation on my old hardware and following the upgrade process to Fedora 25 and VD 2.5.2 earlier in this thread allowed me to swap the SSD onto the new board and get VB running on my new hardware. The advice to fully update the components of the VB 2.4 is well worth following BEFORE running the upgrade of the OS to Fedora 25.

    Leave a comment:


  • lucaberta
    replied
    Today I spent a bit of time doing a couple fresh installs of VB 2.4 and then upgrading them from Fedora 23 to Fedora 25 with the method discussed in the messages in this thread, and things seemed to work well.

    In fact, doing the upgrade from a fresh install was flawless, though I would first recommend to do a full upgrade of the old Fedora 23/VB 2.4 software load, and only after doing it proceed with the manual dnf commands to upgrade to Fedora 25/VB 2.5.

    For what concerns Wirrunna and the question on whether it makes sense to upgrade to Fedora 27, I would be against it just for the fact that the last Fedora version for which Andrew is providing the custom repository with the packages for VortexBox is Fedora 25, as can be seen in the corresponding YUM/DNF repository:

    http://yum.vortexbox.org/releases/

    Currently on my running machine I see no advantage in upgrading to Fedora 25/VB2.5 and so I will keep running the current Fedora 23/VB2.4 machine I have, especially as I don't really like to tinker with LMS if it gets clobbered during the upgrade like I have read above.

    I also don't like to tinker much with my machine, as it's an old MacMini on which I had to perform some tricks to get to install VortexBox, as I could not get neither the USB nor the CD installer to work for EFI BIOS reasons. I ended up installing a Fedora Server 23 software load on the hardware, then proceeded to manually install the Clonezilla image dumps by hand, in order to not mess with the EFI BIOS that Fedora's own installer had put on the hard drive.

    I would only reimage completely my MacMini in case something big like a new important feature become available. If not, I will stick with what I have.

    Bye, Luca

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X