[3.2, bugs] Xen 4.6.3 seems failed

[Eva Star]

1)
I installed Xen 4.6.3 update ( I saw them on the update lisk of
qubes-dom0-update).
After reboot I'm still on Xen 4.6.1-20.fc23
Seems update failed.
Now, qubes-dom0-update say that "Nothing to do"


2) Time to time when "qubes-dom0-update" say "Checking for dom0 updates"
it's not possible at other VMs use internet. Seems something with
priorities at sys-firewall...

--
Regards

[Marek Marczykowski-Górecki]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 09:07:39PM +0300, Eva Star wrote:
> 1)
> I installed Xen 4.6.3 update ( I saw them on the update lisk of
> qubes-dom0-update).
> After reboot I'm still on Xen 4.6.1-20.fc23
> Seems update failed.
> Now, qubes-dom0-update say that "Nothing to do"

Are you booting using EFI, or legacy mode?

> 2) Time to time when "qubes-dom0-update" say "Checking for dom0 updates"
> it's not possible at other VMs use internet. Seems something with priorities
> at sys-firewall...

What exactly do you mean?

- --
Best Regards,
Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
Invisible Things Lab
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJYPxXPAAoJENuP0xzK19cs1b4H/3Jz66sembarJnM7GMj72pna
G+xvA/6XIAXksn4lo/3xoWdpfDxar4kKlCr0P97xHGjh2LcTCnIC1v4GMCRTBGbt
bVT+530ki5PBA8R+iFNVFs517t49WBRUHI0M3Mxrg4S1K8Ikhj17AtBc3PtjVj9h
BuybVohTvHSGKEP2GJI8EX7YyjOLO3li8xqJ2s1cYwlokLHgZvJVA2YETIW0x7g/
1Hg4iPHgiahj+7UqdjHofU///KTFxnlzvlPIprbQ0kZbRUEEe0nV/V9faDkaRk/9
0+N85RZVpI6ja9i8dayw/zfL0sTZtFdNI//SdWgg9RrcrnMfgptOjtjsEnDiPPk=
=rO41
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Eva Star]

On 11/30/2016 09:09 PM, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:


> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 09:07:39PM +0300, Eva Star wrote:
>> 1)
>> I installed Xen 4.6.3 update ( I saw them on the update lisk of
>> qubes-dom0-update).
>> After reboot I'm still on Xen 4.6.1-20.fc23
>> Seems update failed.
>> Now, qubes-dom0-update say that "Nothing to do"
>
> Are you booting using EFI, or legacy mode?

Legacy mode (99%)

>
>> 2) Time to time when "qubes-dom0-update" say "Checking for dom0 updates"
>> it's not possible at other VMs use internet. Seems something with priorities
>> at sys-firewall...
>
> What exactly do you mean?

I mean that I can not open any page at Firefox when "update" running.
Firefox give me "Unresponsive" message.
Maybe issue related to 2/3 of VMs randomly lose network.
My VMs also lose network time to time and I found that it's correlate to
updates checking... Maybe I'm wrong.


--
Regards

[Marek Marczykowski-Górecki]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 09:23:45PM +0300, Eva Star wrote:
> On 11/30/2016 09:09 PM, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:
>
>
> > On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 09:07:39PM +0300, Eva Star wrote:
> > > 1)
> > > I installed Xen 4.6.3 update ( I saw them on the update lisk of
> > > qubes-dom0-update).
> > > After reboot I'm still on Xen 4.6.1-20.fc23
> > > Seems update failed.
> > > Now, qubes-dom0-update say that "Nothing to do"
> >
> > Are you booting using EFI, or legacy mode?
>
> Legacy mode (99%)

Are you using AEM, or have /boot on some external device (not plugged in
during update)?

> > > 2) Time to time when "qubes-dom0-update" say "Checking for dom0 updates"
> > > it's not possible at other VMs use internet. Seems something with priorities
> > > at sys-firewall...
> >
> > What exactly do you mean?
>
> I mean that I can not open any page at Firefox when "update" running.
> Firefox give me "Unresponsive" message.

I have no idea how those two could interact... update process change
exactly nothing in network configuration.

> Maybe issue related to 2/3 of VMs randomly lose network.
> My VMs also lose network time to time and I found that it's correlate to
> updates checking... Maybe I'm wrong.

That would be more likely. But still no idea what happens there.

- --
Best Regards,
Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
Invisible Things Lab
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJYPyR/AAoJENuP0xzK19csMoUH/R1bIcPeJ0kpfuiez46XQ2Gt
3PovPvR2DQeiWhrQ1sgR3CLAsvMBQtddxruxM0Aw7zyuuz+vQA1SGj+wiia27d0f
tWALFxZ5/7MeDbmkX0Z+a5TshfdBdR3zqZuxxxNwSfdH/DPsFM4TBauIcBzVoOA7
4ItGu5cNqVTnHjoXb4lhTIVZtvhZfsZsU9OKAUcP/F8g37VMVjcodLuLISqV0LFF
fkxFtTph+JKgDqFj1YS9PAQgKEeK23ShVmpMXIW0JdrOVpRzH5D5MZKr5b6gR28Q
qmhCJsuud86CCM4JNNe+5p8iLKGUwv6y7m6UF31NSz/cS2Plg2gRsfiHkTa9BTQ=
=CDb5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Eva Star]

On 11/30/2016 10:11 PM, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 09:23:45PM +0300, Eva Star wrote:
>> On 11/30/2016 09:09 PM, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 09:07:39PM +0300, Eva Star wrote:
>>>> 1)
>>>> I installed Xen 4.6.3 update ( I saw them on the update lisk of
>>>> qubes-dom0-update).
>>>> After reboot I'm still on Xen 4.6.1-20.fc23
>>>> Seems update failed.
>>>> Now, qubes-dom0-update say that "Nothing to do"
>>>
>>> Are you booting using EFI, or legacy mode?
>>
>> Legacy mode (99%)
>
> Are you using AEM, or have /boot on some external device (not plugged in
> during update)?

No (for two questions). Default installation. I re-check. I was at "UEFI
or Legacy" mode on the BIOS, but it was working at legacy. Now, I switch
it to Legacy Only. It does not change something.

I have SDD clone of my Qubes on the system. (I do not disconnect it
after move to new SDD). But this second disk only connected. I do not
use /boot on it. Now, I disconnected it and rebooted.






--
Regards

[Eva Star]

On 11/30/2016 10:11 PM, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:

> Are you using AEM, or have /boot on some external device (not plugged in
> during update)?
>

https://i.imgur.com/fhZ5mx3.png
Check this, please.. It say installed on the system (Success). But
nothing after reboot.

--
Regards

[Marek Marczykowski-Górecki]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

What files do you have in /boot? What version(s) of xen-hypervisor
package (rpm -qa xen-hypervisor)?

- --
Best Regards,
Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
Invisible Things Lab
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJYPyo1AAoJENuP0xzK19csnk0IAJBxss8VYwhLMwfl5Q7ESAxD
+/1rKn/nHmKWhvP9LuTYIPlwc+H5LFeg/hhEPLyvHszF6CEa62lcjVBaeLZVjzs+
cytabY9JriA8lZk6jWBvNhkdm8bTbK1MJtk5Vm4HJqDQKn3pSsOYf/MXr1Z2sxQd
iq/5lr/4xknWB8/KB/mpyo7FyqszVxHLKphTfwEL1l2YgoinRKGtqLfhJvy0dT5l
eYaZXkkIqLWt3ys4ZbsoXoCrQJXDWmkr8FHdbzUyQPzOpmMHXfe4d370FX8vKFfx
AgZr5AV7WEFNtNVevzEQnN8q+NsUuuWefKTaKyaUl+bRlol2BJzq87eLwkfXrKo=
=+8hn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Eva Star]

On 11/30/2016 10:36 PM, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 10:24:39PM +0300, Eva Star wrote:
>> On 11/30/2016 10:11 PM, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:
>>
>>> Are you using AEM, or have /boot on some external device (not plugged in
>>> during update)?
>>>
>>
>> https://i.imgur.com/fhZ5mx3.png
>> Check this, please.. It say installed on the system (Success). But nothing
>> after reboot.
>
> What files do you have in /boot? What version(s) of xen-hypervisor
> package (rpm -qa xen-hypervisor)?
>

files:
https://i.imgur.com/qLQuVOF.png

xen-hepyrvisor-4.6.3.-24.fc23
https://i.imgur.com/QuEspcJ.png

--
Regards

[Eva Star]

On 11/30/2016 10:36 PM, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 10:24:39PM +0300, Eva Star wrote:
>> On 11/30/2016 10:11 PM, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:
>>
>>> Are you using AEM, or have /boot on some external device (not plugged in
>>> during update)?
>>>
>>
>> https://i.imgur.com/fhZ5mx3.png
>> Check this, please.. It say installed on the system (Success). But nothing
>> after reboot.
>
> What files do you have in /boot? What version(s) of xen-hypervisor
> package (rpm -qa xen-hypervisor)?
>

I reboot again and disconnect all my drives. And seems I found the
problem with your help. For some reason when I choose my new drive to
boot (from BIOS) then it forward boot process to old drive. It's look
like I'm still on old drive :-/ Does not know why it happens and why it
redirect boot process automatically to /boot from old connected drive,
when I choose to use NEW at BIOS...

Why it do this strange thing?

I will clone my drive again... is it only one way to disconnect my
buckup drive? Or how to say the system to boot from new drive and do not
touch old /boot on the second drive?

I think I found the problem. When I choose

--
Regards

[alf...@gmail.com]

Not long after I first installed Qubes my BIOS was reporting the drives incorrectly in the boot section. I solved it by re-ordering the way the drives were connected to the motherboard.

Regards,
Alf

[Eva Star]

> Not long after I first installed Qubes my BIOS was reporting the drives incorrectly in the boot section. I solved it by re-ordering the way the drives were connected to the motherboard.

Seems it's report them correctly (other name of the drive and it also
report port number), but if secondary old ssd connected and I trying to
boot with new one, it use /boot from newSDD, but then the system work
from oldSSD. Maybe crypsetup mount old partition. Maybe because old and
new cloned cryptsetup partitions have the same id...





--
Regards

[Marek Marczykowski-Górecki]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Yes, most likely - if you have two partitions (possibly on different
disks) with the same UUID, the first detected will be used.

- --
Best Regards,
Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
Invisible Things Lab
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJYPzs8AAoJENuP0xzK19csHrYIAJLrTh+vQ43TB+Nfy9JOYs8v
Yc1YpIx0HiL2XV8JWfmTJ21un7Y4YoKfZ+WsznY5Nchl2GuGoB7jN5E7pqOddAbP
mz5Gdwf7rICud7AB8rk0niwZw8OxUhWrQkhLkXWxnRLII3kcWL4zYNmRSRhLmNyN
5rYoFneZCrRkDwfsN9PUutXc1Pedlq05+lm+LMNQ2W+/ZWC6OKu9Q7FDJA35LYbd
/BqEWmIhTLqQ+Z7X57OE+6deAcdDl0GjrCiDR2co6BpK5feS4A9bOGJf3MKA64ZV
JqEAeANeqg6uokLn1H0jZZa9nEn8FrD93gW/hHh+118wlXfCUrSxICcCzvFVGxo=
=PjIp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Eva Star]

On 11/30/2016 11:48 PM, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:

> Yes, most likely - if you have two partitions (possibly on different
> disks) with the same UUID, the first detected will be used.

Why (GRUB?) first detect second drive, and not search on the drive where
grub installed?
Fixing UUID will not help( It will, but up to next full backup (clone).

p.s. Is it already own qubes buckups fixed? I'm about not strong crypto
function of own qubes buckups.

--
Regards

[Marek Marczykowski-Górecki]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 11:54:42PM +0300, Eva Star wrote:
> On 11/30/2016 11:48 PM, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:
>
> > Yes, most likely - if you have two partitions (possibly on different
> > disks) with the same UUID, the first detected will be used.
>
> Why (GRUB?) first detect second drive, and not search on the drive where
> grub installed?

That's the question to grub gurus. Take a look at its config - there is
"search ... --set=root some-uuid" line. This line have --hint options
(at least in my case), so it should be ok - at least in theory.
If you changed the order of disks (according to BIOS, or maybe physical
connection), that --hint option may still refer to your old disk. Same
applies to BIOS.

Then, Linux kernel will detect disks again, and initramfs will search
for the right UUID. And at this point I think it's purely about order of
detection.

> Fixing UUID will not help( It will, but up to next full backup (clone).
>
> p.s. Is it already own qubes buckups fixed? I'm about not strong crypto
> function of own qubes buckups.

https://github.com/QubesOS/qubes-issues/issues/971
This one? For Qubes 4.0 - yes, but the fix change backup format, so it
isn't feasible for backporting.

- --
Best Regards,
Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
Invisible Things Lab
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJYP0EgAAoJENuP0xzK19csDfcH/ihyB9eGuOucX7OtOWdPiuAH
SMACNImy4Apv5dL/+vxnIzpV6KWD8+nHtI2dT1op+xEJnHQGXD1LAzFGkFTIB2Vh
tSTpRwcotlrGGYYbqtGxZoy8XgtISVm3WYEXsXHlWVFYSEX2KnhFSELdO4mY1E+U
jnOTnJLgMAxq0Njm8B7fQWGkgBjLdclzEhFHutDQdzUqxkiqoJlRnuSG9zNMC7UN
rLkYrkjIdTEaXuudXbB683fJedwRLwmOSiD89nuWhPwIDlU0H+MWbI/T883z1wJL
ZEO47QwMWA7BJWFbwj8JvtXWV3rsYxWZa0qjVOZKUuwHpNDnQlUoAqVxbeiWMTo=
=1/Kv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Eva Star]

On 12/01/2016 12:14 AM, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:


Thanks for help and for the way/info/ point to start from.



--
Regards