Re: weird networking anomaly whereby my gateway always defaults to 0.0.0.0

On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 16:14:05 +0100 Thomas Anderson wrote: > Thanks for thorough reply. > > 1. I am talking about basic network connection. I have an ip, so I > can ping local machines, including the gateway router itself. > > 'ip a' shows the following > > 1: lo: mtu 65536 qdisc noqueue state

Re: weird networking anomaly whereby my gateway always defaults to 0.0.0.0

On 2025-01-24, Thomas Anderson wrote: > 'ip a' shows the following > 'cat /etc/network/interfaces.d/*' shows Could you give us the result with CR. It's unreadable without, especially for commented lines. Perhaps give also ip r

Re: weird networking anomaly whereby my gateway always defaults to 0.0.0.0

Thanks for thorough reply. 1. I am talking about basic network connection. I have an ip, so I can ping local machines, including the gateway router itself. 'ip a' shows the following 1: lo: mtu 65536 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN group default qlen 1000 link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:0

Re: weird networking anomaly whereby my gateway always defaults to 0.0.0.0

Hi Thomas, On Friday, 24 January 2025 08:35:44 GMT-4 Thomas Anderson wrote: > Hello, > > I am using Debian 11, and no matter what I do, I repeated on each > reboot, I will boot into a system with no gateway set (or rather, the > "default route is 0.0.0.0," which naturally gives this device no > in

Re: weird tzdata version numbers

On Sun, Dec 08, 2024 at 19:44:49 +0100, Harald Dunkel wrote: > version number for tzdata in bullseye is 2024b-0+deb11u1, but > for bookworm it is still 2024a-0+deb12u1. This seems weird. > Shouldn't the bookworm version number be "newer" than the bullseye > version? hobbit:~$ apt policy tzdata tzd

Re: Weird MAC address

Am 22.11.2023 um 12:00:52 Uhr schrieb Nicolas George: > Thanks for clarifying. But AFAIK, with proxy ARP, the network mask > covers all the networks covered by the proxy. That is not the case > here. Does your Router have a default route? The it covers 0.0.0.0/0.

Re: Weird MAC address

Am 22.11.2023 um 11:58:55 Uhr schrieb Nicolas George: > I do not see what the router has to do with anything. Can you > elaborate what you mean? Proxy-ARP offers the possibility to answer ARP requests of addresses outside the own subnet sitting on another ethernet link. In normal cases that is no

Re: Weird MAC address

Marco Moock (12023-11-22): > Sorry, not gracious-arp, proxy-arp can be responsible for that. Thanks for clarifying. But AFAIK, with proxy ARP, the network mask covers all the networks covered by the proxy. That is not the case here. Regards, -- Nicolas George

Re: Weird MAC address

Marco Moock (12023-11-22): > Are those networks on the same ethernet link? No, they are on a different VLAN. > Are some systems with wrong subnet masks on the link and the router has > gratious ARP enabled? I do not see what the router has to do with anything. Can you elaborate what you mean? O

Re: Weird MAC address

Am 22.11.2023 um 11:51:36 Uhr schrieb Marco Moock: > Are some systems with wrong subnet masks on the link and the router > has gratious ARP enabled? Sorry, not gracious-arp, proxy-arp can be responsible for that.

Re: Weird MAC address

Am 22.11.2023 um 11:29:47 Uhr schrieb Nicolas George: > As you can see, the server is on the …96.0/22 subnet, i.e. …96-…99, > but it sees MAC addresses on the 100 and 103 networks. Are those networks on the same ethernet link? Are some systems with wrong subnet masks on the link and the router ha

Re: Weird messages on logs.

On 8/10/23 10:44 PM, Maureen L Thomas wrote: Sorry, it was late when I posted this.  I am using Bookworm and checked the log not figuring on finding anything and found this.  My system has been upgrade to the last fixes for Bookworm.  I am using a Lanova all in one machine.  2TB hard drive

Re: Weird messages on logs.

Sorry, it was late when I posted this.  I am using Bookworm and checked the log not figuring on finding anything and found this. My system has been upgrade to the last fixes for Bookworm.  I am using a Lanova all in one machine.  2TB hard drive with 8 for ram. Moe On 8/8/23 7:57 AM, Henning

Re: Weird messages on logs.

On Tue, Aug 08, 2023 at 03:12:59PM -0400, Maureen L Thomas wrote: > Thanks for not top posting. I fixed it for you... > On 8/8/23 7:57 AM, Henning Follmann wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 08, 2023 at 12:01:08AM -0400, Maureen L Thomas wrote: > > >  3:24:29 PM systemd: Failed to start tracker-extract-3.ser

Re: Weird messages on logs.

Sorry, it was late when I posted this.  I am using Bookworm and checked the log not figuring on finding anything and found this. My system has been upgrade to the last fixes.  I am using a Lanova all in one machine. Moe On 8/8/23 7:57 AM, Henning Follmann wrote: On Tue, Aug 08, 2023 at 12:01:

Re: Weird messages on logs.

On Tue, Aug 08, 2023 at 12:01:08AM -0400, Maureen L Thomas wrote: >  3:24:29 PM systemd: Failed to start tracker-extract-3.service - Tracker > metadata extractor. >  3:24:29 PM systemd: Failed to start tracker-extract-3.service - Tracker > metadata extractor. >  3:23:59 PM systemd: Failed to start

Re: Weird behaviour on System under high load

On 5/28/23 03:09, Christian wrote: Ursprüngliche Nachricht Von: David Christensen An: debian-user@lists.debian.org Betreff: Re: Weird behaviour on System under high load Datum: Sat, 27 May 2023 16:30:05 -0700 On 5/27/23 15:28, Christian wrote: New day, new tests. Got a

Re: Weird behaviour on System under high load

> Ursprüngliche Nachricht > Von: David Christensen > An: debian-user@lists.debian.org > Betreff: Re: Weird behaviour on System under high load > Datum: Sat, 27 May 2023 16:30:05 -0700 > > On 5/27/23 15:28, Christian wrote: > > > New day, new tes

Re: Weird behaviour on System under high load

On 5/27/23 15:28, Christian wrote: New day, new tests. Got a crash again, however with the message "AHCI controller unavailable". Figured that is the SATA drives not being plugged in the right order. Corrected that and a 3:30h stress test went so far without any issues besides this old bug https

Re: Weird behaviour on System under high load

> Ursprüngliche Nachricht > Von: David Christensen > An: debian-user@lists.debian.org > Betreff: Re: Weird behaviour on System under high load > Datum: Fri, 26 May 2023 18:22:17 -0700 > > On 5/26/23 16:08, Christian wrote: > > > Good and bad

Re: Weird behaviour on System under high load

On 5/26/23 16:08, Christian wrote: Good and bad things: I started to test different setups (always with full 12 core stress test). Boot from USB liveCD (only stress and s-tui installed): - All disks disconnected, other than M2. Standard BIOS - All disks disconnected, other than M2. Proper Memor

Re: Weird behaviour on System under high load

> Ursprüngliche Nachricht > Von: David Christensen > An: debian-user@lists.debian.org > Betreff: Re: Weird behaviour on System under high load > Datum: Sun, 21 May 2023 15:04:44 -0700 > > > > > > > What stresstest are you using? > >

Re: Weird behaviour on System under high load

On 5/21/23 14:46, Christian wrote: David Christensen Sun, 21 May 2023 14:22:22 -0700 On 5/21/23 06:31, Christian wrote: David Christensen Sun, 21 May 2023 03:11:43 -0700 David Christensen Sat, 20 May 2023 18:00:48 -0700 Heat sinks, heat pipes, water blocks, radiators, fans, ducts, etc.. I

Re: Weird behaviour on System under high load

> Ursprüngliche Nachricht > Von: David Christensen > An: debian-user@lists.debian.org > Betreff: Re: Weird behaviour on System under high load > Datum: Sun, 21 May 2023 14:22:22 -0700 > > On 5/21/23 06:31, Christian wrote: > > David Christensen Sun,

Re: Weird behaviour on System under high load

On 5/21/23 06:31, Christian wrote: David Christensen Sun, 21 May 2023 03:11:43 -0700 >>> David Christensen Sat, 20 May 2023 18:00:48 -0700 Please use inline posting style and proper indentation. Phew... will be quite hard to read. But here you go. It is not hard when you delete the porti

Re: Weird behaviour on System under high load

On 5/21/23 06:26, songbird wrote: David Christensen wrote: ... Measuring actual power supply output and system usage would involve building or buying suitable test equipment. The cost would be non-trivial. ... it depends upon how accurate you want to be and how much power. for my syst

Re: Weird behaviour on System under high load

David Christensen wrote: ... > Measuring actual power supply output and system usage would involve > building or buying suitable test equipment. The cost would be non-trivial. ... it depends upon how accurate you want to be and how much power. for my system it was a simple matter of buying

Re: Weird behaviour on System under high load

> Ursprüngliche Nachricht > Von: David Christensen > An: debian-user@lists.debian.org > Betreff: Re: Weird behaviour on System under high load > Datum: Sun, 21 May 2023 03:11:43 -0700 > > On 5/21/23 01:14, Christian wrote: > > > >

Re: Weird behaviour on System under high load

On 5/21/23 01:14, Christian wrote: Ursprüngliche Nachricht Von: David Christensen An: debian-user@lists.debian.org Betreff: Re: Weird behaviour on System under high load Datum: Sat, 20 May 2023 18:00:48 -0700 On 5/20/23 14:46, Christian wrote: Hi there, I am having trouble

Re: Weird behaviour on System under high load

where unmounted. So would guess this would be a test to see if it is about power? Ursprüngliche Nachricht Von: David Christensen An: debian-user@lists.debian.org Betreff: Re: Weird behaviour on System under high load Datum: Sat, 20 May 2023 18:00:48 -0700 On 5/20/23 14:46, Chri

Re: Weird behaviour on System under high load

On 5/20/23 14:46, Christian wrote: Hi there, I am having trouble with a new build system. It works normal and stable until I put extreme stress on it, e.g. using all 12 cores with stress tool. System will suddenly loose network connection and become unresponsive. Only a reset works. I am not su

Re: weird directory entry on ZFS volume (Re: else or Debian (Re: ZFS performance (was: Re: deduplicating file systems: VDO with Debian?)))

On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 05:54:00AM +0100, hw wrote: ls -la insgesamt 5 drwxr-xr-x  3 namefoo namefoo    3 16. Aug 22:36 . drwxr-xr-x 24 root    root    4096  1. Nov 2017  .. drwxr-xr-x  2 namefoo namefoo    2 21. Jan 2020  ? namefoo@host /srv/datadir $ ls -la '?' ls: Zugriff auf ? nicht möglich:

Re: weird directory entry on ZFS volume (Re: else or Debian (Re: ZFS performance (was: Re: deduplicating file systems: VDO with Debian?)))

On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 06:54:31PM +0100, hw wrote: > Ah, yes. I tricked myself because I don't have hd installed, It's just a symlink to hexdump. lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 7 Jan 20 2022 /usr/bin/hd -> hexdump unicorn:~$ dpkg -S usr/bin/hd bsdextrautils: /usr/bin/hd unicorn:~$ dpkg -S usr/bin/hex

Re: weird directory entry on ZFS volume (Re: else or Debian (Re: ZFS performance (was: Re: deduplicating file systems: VDO with Debian?)))

On Thu, 2022-11-10 at 09:30 -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 02:48:28PM +0100, hw wrote: > > On Thu, 2022-11-10 at 07:03 -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > [...] > > printf '%s\0' * | hexdump > > 000 00c2 6177 7468     > > 007 > > I dislike this outp

Re: weird directory entry on ZFS volume (Re: else or Debian (Re: ZFS performance (was: Re: deduplicating file systems: VDO with Debian?)))

On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 02:48:28PM +0100, hw wrote: > On Thu, 2022-11-10 at 07:03 -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > good idea: > > printf %s * | hexdump > 000 77c2 6861 0074 > 005 Looks like there might be more than one file here. > > If you misrepresented the situat

Re: Weird set -u error

On Fri, 26 Aug 2022, Tim Woodall wrote: $ cat Makefile.test ... Many thanks everybody for all of the help understanding this. Not this exact issue but effectively the same was reported in bug #944780 and the unbound variable in /etc/bash.bashrc was reported in #941248 I've now submitted a

Re: Weird set -u error

On Sun, 28 Aug 2022 at 01:30, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Sun, Aug 28, 2022 at 12:46:17AM +1000, David wrote: > > I think there might be one remaining aspect still mysterious, so there > > might be yet another factor beyond the FIVE you identified ... > > > > The fact that this statement, first sho

Re: Weird set -u error

On Sun, Aug 28, 2022 at 12:46:17AM +1000, David wrote: > I think there might be one remaining aspect still mysterious, so there > might be yet another factor beyond the FIVE you identified ... > > The fact that this statement, first shown by Tim, does NOT error: > > $ ( bash -uc : ; : ) (insid

Re: Weird set -u error

On Sun, 28 Aug 2022 at 00:17, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 09:52:11AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > I also can't explain this (still inside the ssh localhost session): > > > > unicorn:~$ (bash -c 'declare -p PS1') > > declare -- PS1="\\h:\\w\\\$ " > > unicorn:~$ (bash -cu 'dec

Re: Weird set -u error

On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 09:52:11AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: > I also can't explain this (still inside the ssh localhost session): > > > unicorn:~$ (bash -c 'declare -p PS1') > declare -- PS1="\\h:\\w\\\$ " > unicorn:~$ (bash -cu 'declare -p PS1') > /etc/bash.bashrc: line 7: PS1: unbound variab

Re: Weird set -u error

On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 05:12:57PM +1000, David wrote: > I have modified my ssh environment so that it is not the default. > But I do see a similar error message, using ssh from stable Debian 11. > > [david@kablamm ~]$ ( bash -cu : ) > [david@kablamm ~]$ ssh kablamm > Linux kablamm 5.10.0-16-amd64

Re: Weird set -u error

On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 12:11:47AM -0500, David Wright wrote: > On Sat 27 Aug 2022 at 00:23:10 (-0400), gene heskett wrote: > > On 8/26/22 20:35, David wrote: > > > On Sat, 27 Aug 2022 at 10:27, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > > I get these results as well, with Debian 11's packaged bash. > > > Yeah, s

Re: Weird set -u error

On Sat, 27 Aug 2022 at 16:49, Tim Woodall wrote: > This just gets weirder and weirder. > > It looks like it's related to logging in with ssh: [..] > apt-mirror@aptmirror17:~$ ( bash -cu : ) > apt-mirror@aptmirror17:~$ > apt-mirror@aptmirror17:~$ ssh aptmirror17 > Last login: Sat Aug 27 06:23:1

Re: Weird set -u error

On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 07:49:17AM +0100, Tim Woodall wrote: > On Sat, 27 Aug 2022, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > > On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 11:22:09AM +1000, David wrote: > > > On Sat, 27 Aug 2022 at 10:27, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > > > > > Has anyone managed to reproduce the OP's results, either

Re: Weird set -u error

On Sat, 27 Aug 2022, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 11:22:09AM +1000, David wrote: On Sat, 27 Aug 2022 at 10:27, Greg Wooledge wrote: Has anyone managed to reproduce the OP's results, either getting "interactive" from a bash -c call, or seeing *any* evidence that /etc/bash.b

Re: Weird set -u error

On Sat, 27 Aug 2022 at 15:07, wrote: > On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 11:22:09AM +1000, David wrote: > > On Sat, 27 Aug 2022 at 10:27, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > Has anyone managed to reproduce the OP's results, either getting > > > "interactive" from a bash -c call, or seeing *any* evidence that > > >

Re: Weird set -u error

On Sat 27 Aug 2022 at 00:23:10 (-0400), gene heskett wrote: > On 8/26/22 20:35, David wrote: > > On Sat, 27 Aug 2022 at 10:27, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > I get these results as well, with Debian 11's packaged bash. > > Yeah, sorry, I forgot to include, for the record: > > > > $ echo $BASH_VERSION

Re: Weird set -u error

On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 11:22:09AM +1000, David wrote: > On Sat, 27 Aug 2022 at 10:27, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > Has anyone managed to reproduce the OP's results, either getting > > "interactive" from a bash -c call, or seeing *any* evidence that > > /etc/bash.bashrc or ~/.bashrc is sourced from

Re: Weird set -u error

On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 10:32:06AM +1000, David wrote: > On Sat, 27 Aug 2022 at 10:27, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 10:21:08AM +1000, David wrote: > > > > Just sharing something that I tried, to shed some more light > > > on this, in case that's useful ... > > > > > > $ foo()

Re: Weird set -u error

On 8/26/22 20:35, David wrote: On Sat, 27 Aug 2022 at 10:27, Greg Wooledge wrote: On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 10:21:08AM +1000, David wrote: Just sharing something that I tried, to shed some more light on this, in case that's useful ... $ foo() { case "$-" in *i* ) i=interactive ;; * ) i=not-inte

Re: Weird set -u error

On Sat, 27 Aug 2022 at 10:27, Greg Wooledge wrote: > Has anyone managed to reproduce the OP's results, either getting > "interactive" from a bash -c call, or seeing *any* evidence that > /etc/bash.bashrc or ~/.bashrc is sourced from a bash -c call? On Debian 11, when I create a test user, login

Re: Weird set -u error

On Sat, 27 Aug 2022 at 10:27, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 10:21:08AM +1000, David wrote: > > Just sharing something that I tried, to shed some more light > > on this, in case that's useful ... > > > > $ foo() { case "$-" in *i* ) i=interactive ;; * ) i=not-interactive ;; > > es

Re: Weird set -u error

On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 10:21:08AM +1000, David wrote: > Just sharing something that I tried, to shed some more light > on this, in case that's useful ... > > $ foo() { case "$-" in *i* ) i=interactive ;; * ) i=not-interactive ;; > esac ; echo $BASHPID $i ; } > $ declare -fx foo > $ foo > 2415 int

Re: Weird set -u error

On Sat, 27 Aug 2022 at 08:54, Tim Woodall wrote: > On Fri, 26 Aug 2022, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 10:57:44AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: > I modified /etc/bash.bashrc to prove it was only being sourced in the > second case above (it prints the value of PS1) > > And now I

Re: Weird set -u error

On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 11:54:06PM +0100, Tim Woodall wrote: > I modified /etc/bash.bashrc to prove it was only being sourced in the > second case above (it prints the value of PS1) > > And now I can reproduce without -u > $ bash -c : > $ ( bash -c : ) > 'PS1=' > $ ( bash -c : ; : ) > $ I can't r

Re: Weird set -u error

On Fri, 26 Aug 2022, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 10:57:44AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: [...] There are also various hacks that are compiled into Debian's version of bash [...] At this moment, I'm kind of leaning toward one of those hacks being triggered by your specifi

Re: Weird set -u error

On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 10:57:44AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: [...] > There are also various hacks that are compiled into Debian's version > of bash [...] > At this moment, I'm kind of leaning toward one of those hacks being > triggered by your specific combination of factors. That's the most

Re: Weird set -u error

On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 02:51:47PM +0100, Tim Woodall wrote: > The real Makefile has -euo pipefail I have stopped reading and caring now. Good luck.

Re: Weird set -u error

On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 02:40:55PM +0100, Tim Woodall wrote: > But that's backwards, make is starting an interactive shell when its > output is redirected. When I don't redirect make's output it works. I thought you were piping in the original message. There is a difference between a pipe, and a

Re: Weird set -u error

On Fri, 26 Aug 2022 at 23:41, Tim Woodall wrote: > On Fri, 26 Aug 2022, David wrote: > > On Fri, 26 Aug 2022 at 22:14, wrote: > >> And then, there's that other riddle: why is a shell invoked from a > >> Makefile sourcing /etc/bash.bashrc in the first place? > > > > Hi, my understanding is that t

Re: Weird set -u error

On Fri, 26 Aug 2022, David wrote: On Fri, 26 Aug 2022 at 22:14, wrote: On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 07:24:44AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 08:17:10AM +0100, Tim Woodall wrote: [...] On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 11:04:25AM +0200, Thomas Schmitt wrote: to...@tuxteam.de wrote:

Re: Weird set -u error

On Fri, 26 Aug 2022, David wrote: On Fri, 26 Aug 2022 at 22:14, wrote: And then, there's that other riddle: why is a shell invoked from a Makefile sourcing /etc/bash.bashrc in the first place? Hi, my understanding is that the rule commands in the Makefile are run by a shell, one for each li

Re: Weird set -u error

On Fri, 26 Aug 2022 at 22:14, wrote: > On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 07:24:44AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 08:17:10AM +0100, Tim Woodall wrote: [...] > > On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 11:04:25AM +0200, Thomas Schmitt wrote: > > > to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > But all in all we're s

Re: Weird set -u error

On Fri, 26 Aug 2022 at 22:14, wrote: > And then, there's that other riddle: why is a shell invoked from a > Makefile sourcing /etc/bash.bashrc in the first place? Hi, my understanding is that the rule commands in the Makefile are run by a shell, one for each line. The output stream of those comm

Re: Weird set -u error

On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 07:24:44AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 08:17:10AM +0100, Tim Woodall wrote: > > $ cat Makefile.test > > SHELL := /bin/bash -u > > WHY?! > > > Why do I get that unbound variable error? > > Because you turned on set -u in a place where the code had

Re: Weird set -u error

On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 11:14:37AM +0100, Tim Woodall wrote: > $ bash -uic 'echo done' > bash: SUDO_USER: unbound variable > bash: color_prompt: unbound variable > done > $ Cute. Mine's even weirder: unicorn:~$ bash -uic 'echo done' bash: SUDO_USER: unbound variable bash: no: unbound variable do

Re: Weird set -u error

On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 08:17:10AM +0100, Tim Woodall wrote: > $ cat Makefile.test > SHELL := /bin/bash -u WHY?! > Why do I get that unbound variable error? Because you turned on set -u in a place where the code had not been adjusted to account for set -u's foibles. set -u breaks scripts. It's

Re: Weird set -u error

On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 09:19:03AM +0100, Tim Woodall wrote: [...] Yes, I know how to fix it. That is straight forward. SUDO_USER and SUDO_PS1 have similar issues, debian_chroot works in the presence of set -u I see. But I don't understand why /etc/bash.bashrc is being sourced by make w

Re: Weird set -u error

On Fri, 26 Aug 2022 at 18:02, wrote: > On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 08:17:10AM +0100, Tim Woodall wrote: > > $ cat Makefile.test > > SHELL := /bin/bash -u > > MAKEFLAGS += --no-builtin-rules > > .SUFFIXES: > > > > all: > > echo done > > $ make -f Makefile.test > > echo done > > done > > $ make

Re: Weird set -u error

On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 11:04:25AM +0200, Thomas Schmitt wrote: > Hi, > > to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > Why {PS1:+x} rather than {PS1:-}? > > It seemed to be the nearest suitable variation which was similar to the > proposal > [ ${var+x} ] [...] Thanks :) Cheers -- t signature.asc Descripti

Re: Weird set -u error

Hi, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > Why {PS1:+x} rather than {PS1:-}? It seemed to be the nearest suitable variation which was similar to the proposal [ ${var+x} ] in https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3601515/how-to-check-if-a-variable-is-set-in-bash where one can see a nice table of ${VARIABLE.

Re: Weird set -u error

On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 09:19:03AM +0100, Tim Woodall wrote: [...] > Yes, I know how to fix it. That is straight forward. SUDO_USER and > SUDO_PS1 have similar issues, debian_chroot works in the presence of set > -u I see. > But I don't understand why /etc/bash.bashrc is being sourced by make >

Re: Weird set -u error

On Fri, 26 Aug 2022, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 08:17:10AM +0100, Tim Woodall wrote: $ cat Makefile.test SHELL := /bin/bash -u MAKEFLAGS += --no-builtin-rules .SUFFIXES: all: echo done $ make -f Makefile.test echo done done $ make -f Makefile.test | cat echo done /

Re: Weird set -u error

On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 10:01:06AM +0200, Thomas Schmitt wrote: > Hi, > > > $ cat Makefile.test > > SHELL := /bin/bash -u > > [...] > > /etc/bash.bashrc: line 7: PS1: unbound variable > > [...] > > Why do I get that unbound variable error? > > According to a comment in /etc/bash.bashrc it tests f

Re: Weird set -u error

On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 08:17:10AM +0100, Tim Woodall wrote: > $ cat Makefile.test > SHELL := /bin/bash -u > MAKEFLAGS += --no-builtin-rules > .SUFFIXES: > > all: > echo done > $ make -f Makefile.test > echo done > done > $ make -f Makefile.test | cat > echo done > /etc/bash.bashrc: line 7

Re: Weird set -u error

Hi, > $ cat Makefile.test > SHELL := /bin/bash -u > [...] > /etc/bash.bashrc: line 7: PS1: unbound variable > [...] > Why do I get that unbound variable error? According to a comment in /etc/bash.bashrc it tests for emptiness of PS1 in order to detect non-interactive shell sessions: # If not r

Re: Weird setxkbmap behavior

Also, forgot to mention: I'm using debian unstable with just a window manager (no desktop environment). Jun 28, 2022, 21:21 by niculaio...@tutanota.com: > I have the following problem since yesterday: > > When I switch the layout of the keyboard to Romanian with `setxkbmap ro > -variant std` an

Re: Weird printing issue...

On 6/15/22 03:26, nimrod wrote: Hi, this actually could seem a LibreOffice issue, but I'm not so sure. In this image you can see a tipical library index card, 3x5 inches. It is a page of Writer document whose page style has exactly these dimensions, 3"x5". It prints quite well on the physical c

Re: Weird printing issue...

On sab, 2022-04-09 at 04:28 -0400, Bijan Soleymani wrote: > On 2022-04-09 03:52, nimrod wrote: > > Thanks for your advice. Unfortunately I couldn't find any setting > > about > > Postscript, PCL or such in CUPS, HPLIP and the usual Gnome > > utilities to > > manage printers. > > > > The only spo

Re: Weird printing issue...

On 2022-04-09 03:52, nimrod wrote: Thanks for your advice. Unfortunately I couldn't find any setting about Postscript, PCL or such in CUPS, HPLIP and the usual Gnome utilities to manage printers. The only spot where I see something like what you say is from Libreoffice printer's details, File

Re: Weird printing issue...

On 2022-04-09 03:52, nimrod wrote: Thanks for your advice. Unfortunately I couldn't find any setting about Postscript, PCL or such in CUPS, HPLIP and the usual Gnome utilities to manage printers. The only spot where I see something like what you say is from Libreoffice printer's details, File

Re: Weird printing issue...

On gio, 2022-04-07 at 20:09 -0400, Bijan Soleymani wrote: > On 2022-04-07 18:20, nimrod wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm getting very strange, and ugly, prints with LibreOffice, Evince > > and > > Atril. You can see what I mean in the linked screenshot below. > > > > The "screen

Re: Weird printing issue...

On 2022-04-07 18:20, nimrod wrote: Hi, I'm getting very strange, and ugly, prints with LibreOffice, Evince and Atril. You can see what I mean in the linked screenshot below. The "screen " image shows what I see when I open a PDF file, with Evince, Atril, PD

Re: Weird delay in ssh login

On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 08:47:59AM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote: > >> The connection looks like: [...] > > This smells like your VM's ssh server is trying to reverse-resolve > > the client's IP address [...] > My intuition also suggests this possibility but I tried to put `UseDNS > no` in /etc/ss

Re: Weird delay in ssh login

On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 07:18:36PM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote: > Hi, > > I have a VM here which gives me weird delays when I log into it (which > I can only do via SSH) since I upgraded it to Bullseye. > > The connection looks like: > > % ssh -v ... > [...] > debug1: control_persist

Re: Weird WiFi problem

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 09:50:04PM -0400, Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside wrote: > > > On 2021-05-24 1:16 p.m., Henning Follmann wrote: > > On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 12:24:30PM -0400, Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside > > wrote: [...] > >> > >> What a crazy thing here... > >> Now desktop environmen

Re: Weird WiFi problem

Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside wrote: > You are exactly pointing to a real solution here. > It's jumping pretty fast to conclusion about Gnome itself being the > cause of any type of network problem. Sorry for the sarcasm and it might be inappropriate on the list, but I can not hold it :D Gnome

Re: Weird WiFi problem

On 2021-05-24 1:16 p.m., Henning Follmann wrote: > On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 12:24:30PM -0400, Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside > wrote: >> >> >> On 2021-05-24 11:47 a.m., Juan R. de Silva wrote: >>> On Sun, 23 May 2021 21:53:45 -0700, David Christensen wrote: >>> > [...] >>> >>> I finally narrowed

Re: Weird WiFi problem

On 2021-05-24 1:31 p.m., Charles Curley wrote: > On Mon, 24 May 2021 15:47:26 - (UTC) > "Juan R. de Silva" wrote: > >> Right now I'm inclined to resolve this odd problem by reinstalling >> Debian. It looks to be an easier path comparing to finding a weird >> GNOME bug without even having a

Re: Weird WiFi problem

On Mon, 24 May 2021 15:47:26 - (UTC) "Juan R. de Silva" wrote: > Right now I'm inclined to resolve this odd problem by reinstalling > Debian. It looks to be an easier path comparing to finding a weird > GNOME bug without even having a minimal clue of what part might be > responsible for it.

Re: Weird WiFi problem

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 12:24:30PM -0400, Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside wrote: > > > On 2021-05-24 11:47 a.m., Juan R. de Silva wrote: > > On Sun, 23 May 2021 21:53:45 -0700, David Christensen wrote: > > [...] > > > > I finally narrowed the problem to one specific source by installing > > W

Re: Weird WiFi problem

On 2021-05-24 11:47 a.m., Juan R. de Silva wrote: > On Sun, 23 May 2021 21:53:45 -0700, David Christensen wrote: > >> On 5/23/21 4:55 PM, Juan R. de Silva wrote: >>> Help needed from somebody with the better networking knowledge than >>> mine. >>> >>> Debian Buster on Dell M4800 Mobile Workstati

Re: Weird WiFi problem

On Sun, 23 May 2021 21:53:45 -0700, David Christensen wrote: > On 5/23/21 4:55 PM, Juan R. de Silva wrote: >> Help needed from somebody with the better networking knowledge than >> mine. >> >> Debian Buster on Dell M4800 Mobile Workstation, Intel Corporation >> Wireless 7260 (rev bb) WiFi adapter

Re: Weird WiFi problem

On 5/23/21 4:55 PM, Juan R. de Silva wrote: Help needed from somebody with the better networking knowledge than mine. Debian Buster on Dell M4800 Mobile Workstation, Intel Corporation Wireless 7260 (rev bb) WiFi adapter. The ISP modem offers 2 WiFi bands: 2.4G & 5G. The system connects automatic

Re: weird behaviour of quotes in dash variable assignments

On Tue 22 Sep 2020 at 13:31:33 (-0400), Gary Dale wrote: > On 2020-09-22 09:29, David Wright wrote: > > On Mon 21 Sep 2020 at 20:50:29 (-0400), Gary Dale wrote: > > > On 2020-09-21 10:30, David Wright wrote: > > > > I think we should apply Hanlon's razor rather than saying the OP lied. > > > > Aft

Re: weird behaviour of quotes in bash variable assignments

On Ma, 22 sep 20, 16:37:40, Gary Dale wrote: > > Your first point makes it impossible for me to present anything because this > list doesn't (AFAIK) allow attachments. This is a myth, I just attached a small script to this message. The list apparently does indeed filter some attachments most lik

Re: weird behaviour of quotes in bash variable assignments

On 2020-09-22 01:48, Andrei POPESCU wrote: On Lu, 21 sep 20, 17:22:26, Gary Dale wrote: I presented the line that failed, copied and pasted from the Konsole session. What more do you want, other than to complain? In such cases it is best to attach[1] the smallest complete[2] script demonstratin

Re: weird behaviour of quotes in dash variable assignments

On 2020-09-22 00:25, David Christensen wrote: On 2020-09-21 18:04, Gary Dale wrote: The two servers are for different customers. I would not want to create a tunnel between them. Instead I have my normal ssh tunnels to each server from my workstation. However the script is only readable by ro

Re: weird behaviour of quotes in dash variable assignments

On 2020-09-22 09:29, David Wright wrote: On Mon 21 Sep 2020 at 20:50:29 (-0400), Gary Dale wrote: On 2020-09-21 10:30, David Wright wrote: On Mon 21 Sep 2020 at 08:18:52 (-0400), Greg Wooledge wrote: On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 07:55:45AM -0400, Cindy Sue Causey wrote: '…' and "…" are known as ne

Re: weird behaviour of quotes in bash variable assignments

On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 04:37:40PM -0400, Gary Dale wrote: > The smallest complete script then is > > report=”/root/clamscan-report” > echo $report There are three errors in this script. 1) There is no shebang line. 2) You've got curly quotes instead of ASCII double-quotes. 3) You used a variabl

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   >