1:59 p.m.
Hello!
TL;DR is there a list where announcements are made regarding
configuration changes requiring manual intervention?
Today I noticed that the clock in my Fedora 33 workstation install was
about five minutes fast. Some examination revealed that none of the
sources chrony was using for NTP were working. There was, however, a
new configuration file, /etc/chrony.conf.rpmnew, which changed the
sources from specific IP addresses to a pool URL. It would have been
nice if there was some kind of notification that the current chrony
configuration is broken, and it can't be fixed automatically. Is there
a list, or some other method, by which I could be notified of these
sorts of things? Not for specific packages necessarily, but just in
general, even if it is high-traffic?
--
Terveisin / Regards,
Matti Pulkkinen
10:39 p.m.
在 2021-04-12星期一的 21:59 +0300，Matti Pulkkinen写道：
Hello!
TL;DR is there a list where announcements are made regarding
configuration changes requiring manual intervention?
Today I noticed that the clock in my Fedora 33 workstation install
was
about five minutes fast. Some examination revealed that none of the
sources chrony was using for NTP were working. There was, however, a
new configuration file, /etc/chrony.conf.rpmnew, which changed the
sources from specific IP addresses to a pool URL. It would have been
It should be
using a pool URL for a long time.
nice if there was some kind of notification that the current chrony
configuration is broken, and it can't be fixed automatically. Is
there
I think it's not due to a broken configuration, maybe a broken NTP
server is specified? Can you diff those two configurations?
a list, or some other method, by which I could be notified of these
sorts of things? Not for specific packages necessarily, but just in
general, even if it is high-traffic?
IIRC dnf will give you a message during
upgrading. And configuration
file change may be too frequent that setting a mailing list will not be
that helpful.
After all, if you don't touch those configurations, rpm will upgrade
them like its doing with other files, even when they are marked as
%config(noreplace).
To avoid this, keep tracking on config files you changed, look at
outputs during update, or avoid changing them at all (if possible, use
/etc/xxx.d/xxx.conf instead).
--
Terveisin / Regards,
Matti Pulkkinen
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-
US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproje
ct.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
3:18 a.m.
ti, 2021-04-13 kello 11:39 +0800, Qiyu Yan kirjoitti:
I think it's not due to a broken configuration, maybe a broken
NTP
server is specified? Can you diff those two configurations?
Sure:
1,5d0
< # These servers were defined in the installation:
< server 49.57.50.46 iburst
< server 56.57.46.49 iburst
< server 50.51.46.55 iburst
<
7c2,3
< # Please consider joining the pool
(http://www.pool.ntp.org/join.html).
---
# Please consider joining the pool
(https://www.pool.ntp.org/join.html).
pool 2.fedora.pool.ntp.org iburst
IIRC dnf will give you a message during upgrading. And configuration
file change may be too frequent that setting a mailing list will not
be
that helpful.
Ah, I use Gnome Software for updates most of the time, so I wouldn't
see messages output by dnf.
After all, if you don't touch those configurations, rpm will upgrade
them like its doing with other files, even when they are marked as
%config(noreplace).
I have never touched this config file. I didn't even know it existed
before yesterday.
--
Terveisin / Regards,
Matti Pulkkinen
6:57 a.m.
在 2021-04-13星期二的 11:18 +0300，Matti Pulkkinen写道：
ti, 2021-04-13 kello 11:39 +0800, Qiyu Yan kirjoitti:
> I think it's not due to a broken configuration, maybe a broken NTP
> server is specified? Can you diff those two configurations?
Sure:
1,5d0
< # These servers were defined in the installation:
"defined in the
installation": this means the list of servers is
specifyed by installer.
< server 49.57.50.46 iburst
< server 56.57.46.49 iburst
< server 50.51.46.55 iburst
<
7c2,3
< # Please consider joining the pool
(http://www.pool.ntp.org/join.html).
---
> # Please consider joining the pool
(https://www.pool.ntp.org/join.html).
> pool 2.fedora.pool.ntp.org iburst
As you see, the difference is only in
server/pool settings.
>
> IIRC dnf will give you a message during upgrading. And
> configuration
> file change may be too frequent that setting a mailing list will
> not
> be
> that helpful.
Ah, I use Gnome Software for updates most of the time, so I wouldn't
see messages output by dnf.
>
> After all, if you don't touch those configurations, rpm will
> upgrade
> them like its doing with other files, even when they are marked as
> %config(noreplace).
>
I have never touched this config file. I didn't even know it existed
before yesterday.
I see, seems that those ntp server is specified during Fedora
installation, and the server choosed gets broken for some reason. The
update didn't break anything, problem is from the 3 servers.
--
Terveisin / Regards,
Matti Pulkkinen
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-
US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproje
ct.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
12:59 p.m.
ti, 2021-04-13 kello 19:57 +0800, Qiyu Yan kirjoitti:
"defined in the installation": this means the list of
servers is
specifyed by installer.
As in Anaconda?
As you see, the difference is only in server/pool settings.
Yes, but that's not unexpected because that's where the problem was.
I see, seems that those ntp server is specified during Fedora
installation, and the server choosed gets broken for some reason. The
update didn't break anything, problem is from the 3 servers.
Yes, the update is what fixed the broken configuration. Or it would
have, if it hadn't instead made a .rpmnew file instead.
--
Terveising / Regards,
Matti Pulkkinen
11:12 p.m.
在 2021-04-13星期二的 20:59 +0300，Matti Pulkkinen写道：
As in Anaconda?
Yes, It should be set in anaconda in someway.
Yes, but that's not unexpected because that's where the problem was.
Yes, the update is what fixed the broken configuration. Or it would
have, if it hadn't instead made a .rpmnew file instead.
rpm don't know what
is "broken configuration". Some users want's to
override configuration and keep them as it is, rpm won't touch those
files it just give you information during updating.
--
Terveising / Regards,
Matti Pulkkinen
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-
US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproje
ct.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
--
Qiyu Yan
GPG keyid: 0x4FC914F065F2DF12
1:53 p.m.
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 09:59:34PM +0300, Matti Pulkkinen wrote:
configuration is broken, and it can't be fixed automatically. Is
there
a list, or some other method, by which I could be notified of these
sorts of things? Not for specific packages necessarily, but just in
general, even if it is high-traffic?
You may consider enabling the "rpmconf" plugin for DNF. This will by default
attempt to merge such files -- or you can set the `diff` config option to
make it just show you the differences.
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
2:26 p.m.
ti, 2021-04-13 kello 14:53 -0400, Matthew Miller kirjoitti:
You may consider enabling the "rpmconf" plugin for DNF.
This will by
default
attempt to merge such files -- or you can set the `diff` config
option to
make it just show you the differences.
That's a very good call, thank you. From what I can tell by reading
about this, I don't think the dnf plugin would work when I update
through Gnome Software, but it looks like there's a related standalone
tool called rpmconf that I think will do just the trick if I run it by
hand every now and then. Thanks!
--
Terveising / Regards,
Matti Pulkkinen
1091
days inactive
1102
days old
7 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Matthew Miller -
Matti Pulkkinen -
Qiyu Yan