ubuntu mirror repository outdated

[chriss]

It looks like vpslink's ubuntu mirror repository is a bit out of date. I couldn't get the updated versions of a few packages until I swapped back to the default ubuntu repo's.

Thought I'd highlight it here for action by the admins and to suggest that any others using the mirrors switch to the ubuntu update servers until these ones are confirmed up to date.

[DanL@VPSLink]

I checked with our system administrators to confirm that our repository was updated as recently as 5/21/2009.

Was your last attempt to sync from the repository before or after the update? I'd be happy to investigate further with our system administrators if there may be any further issues with the repo.

[chriss]

Hi Dan,
I was doing the updates on the 23rd.

From my aptitude.log
aptitude update; aptitude safe-upgrade against the vpslink mirror:

Aptitude 0.4.9: log report
Sat, May 23 2009 19:03:22 +0200

IMPORTANT: this log only lists intended actions; actions which fail due to
dpkg problems may not be completed.

Will install 2 packages, and remove 0 packages.
===============================================================================
[HOLD] postfix
[HOLD] postfix-mysql
[UPGRADE] apparmor 2.1+1075-0ubuntu9.1 -> 2.1+1075-0ubuntu9.2
[UPGRADE] ntpdate 1:4.2.4p4+dfsg-3ubuntu2.1 -> 1:4.2.4p4+dfsg-3ubuntu2.2
===============================================================================

Log complete.

aptitude update; aptitude safe-upgrade against the us ubuntu servers:

Aptitude 0.4.9: log report
Sat, May 23 2009 22:36:05 +0200

IMPORTANT: this log only lists intended actions; actions which fail due to
dpkg problems may not be completed.

Will install 11 packages, and remove 0 packages.
6885kB of disk space will be used
===============================================================================
[HOLD, DEPENDENCIES] clamav-freshclam
[HOLD] clamav
[HOLD] clamav-daemon
[HOLD] postfix
[HOLD] postfix-mysql
[UPGRADE] apparmor-profiles 2.1+1075-0ubuntu9 -> 2.1+1075-0ubuntu9.2
[UPGRADE] clamav-base 0.92.1~dfsg2-1.1 -> 0.94.dfsg.2-1ubuntu0.3~hardy4
[UPGRADE] fail2ban 0.8.2-2 -> 0.8.2-2ubuntu0.1
[UPGRADE] htop 0.6.6+svn20070915-1 -> 0.6.6+svn20070915-1ubuntu0.2
[UPGRADE] libclamav3 0.92.1~dfsg2-1.1 -> 0.92.1~dfsg2-1.1ubuntu0.5
[UPGRADE] libglib2.0-data 2.16.3-1 -> 2.16.6-0ubuntu1.1
[UPGRADE] phpmyadmin 4:2.11.3-1ubuntu1 -> 4:2.11.3-1ubuntu1.1
[UPGRADE] python-dns 2.3.1-2 -> 2.3.1-2ubuntu0.2
[UPGRADE] spamassassin 3.2.4-1ubuntu1 -> 3.2.4-1ubuntu1.1
[UPGRADE] spamc 3.2.4-1ubuntu1 -> 3.2.4-1ubuntu1.1
[UPGRADE] squirrelmail 2:1.4.13-2ubuntu1 -> 2:1.4.13-2ubuntu1.2
===============================================================================

Log complete.

[SomeoneE1se]

what are the two different sources.list are you using?

[chriss]

Originally Posted by SomeoneE1se

what are the two different sources.list are you using?

I was thinking the same thing and I think the mystery may be solved.

I suspect the updates listed are all universe security updates, but my sources.list line did not include universe for hardy-security:

deb http://mirror.vpslink.com/ubuntu hardy-security main restricted

I've been trying to see if I could find out where I got that line from so that I can get it changed, but searching this site hasn't revealed anything. Guess it's just plain old user error as usual. aargh..

[askewdread]

apt-get update didnt fix it?

[chriss]

Originally Posted by askewdread

apt-get update didnt fix it?

Unfortunately not.

apt-get and aptitude can only act on the information they are given from the sources.list file. So if that file is deficient, as in my case the missing universe entry from the hardy-security line, there's nothing either program can do without human intervention.

My current version of aptitude doesn't have Super Cow Powers.

[rxKaffee]

Hey Chriss, I hope this doesn't sidetrack your thread too much, but I was wondering about one of the packages you have in your list there.

I thought AppArmor required kernel support. Did I misunderstand this requirement, or are you not using AppArmor in the way that is expected?

[chriss]

Originally Posted by rxKaffee

I thought AppArmor required kernel support. Did I misunderstand this requirement, or are you not using AppArmor in the way that is expected?

Would the kernel supported by Xen (as opposed to the one available with OpenVZ) make a difference? I don't know.

As far as the package goes, it appears to have been auto-installed when I installed mysql-server, together with apparmor-profiles. Can't say how/whether it works, as I immediately disabled it. Conventional wisdom (at that time - 8.04) seemed to indicate that it could interfere with some files that needed editing, probably as a result of packages that lacked the necessary apparmor settings/configurations/profiles.

In all honesty, I haven't missed it and neither have I put much effort into working with it. It seems like a surplus package to me as I don't have much use for it at the moment. Maybe sometime between now and the next LTS update, I 'll spare some effort and take some time to get to know it.

[paul]

Hi Chriss did you upgrade to Ubuntu 9.04?