From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 77F0C1FF15C for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2025 10:09:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 42B19FC96; Fri, 8 Aug 2025 10:11:02 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2025 10:10:26 +0200 From: Fabian =?iso-8859-1?q?Gr=FCnbichler?= To: Proxmox VE development discussion References: <20250807203004.336616-1-s.ivanov@proxmox.com> <20250807203004.336616-3-s.ivanov@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <20250807203004.336616-3-s.ivanov@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: astroid/0.17.0 (https://github.com/astroidmail/astroid) Message-Id: <1754640231.ttbnttqek4.astroid@yuna.none> X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1754640605099 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.048 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [proxmox.com, pve8to9.pm] Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH manager v3 2/2] 8 to 9 checks: check for removable grub-install X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-devel" On August 7, 2025 10:30 pm, Stoiko Ivanov wrote: > some upgrades result in unbootable systems, which can be traced back > to grub being installed in BOOTX64.efi, but not being upgraded by > grub-install. Refer the cases to the output of > `proxmox-boot-tool refresh` as it has a sensible check logic for those > cases. Some affected systems printed the warning of proxmox-boot-tool, > but it was lost in the large output of the dist-upgrade. > > Signed-off-by: Stoiko Ivanov > --- > PVE/CLI/pve8to9.pm | 11 ++++++++++- > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/PVE/CLI/pve8to9.pm b/PVE/CLI/pve8to9.pm > index 6381e62f..c2e830a9 100644 > --- a/PVE/CLI/pve8to9.pm > +++ b/PVE/CLI/pve8to9.pm > @@ -1569,6 +1569,7 @@ sub check_bootloader { > return; > } > > + my $boot_ok = 1; > if (-f "/etc/kernel/proxmox-boot-uuids") { > if (!$upgraded) { > log_skip("not yet upgraded, systemd-boot still needed for bootctl"); > @@ -1587,13 +1588,21 @@ sub check_bootloader { > . " boot-related packages. Remove 'systemd-boot' See" > . " https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Upgrade_from_8_to_9#sd-boot-warning for more information." > ); > + $boot_ok = 0; > } > if (!-f "/usr/share/doc/grub-efi-amd64/changelog.Debian.gz") { > log_warn("System booted in uefi mode but grub-efi-amd64 meta-package not installed," > . " new grub versions will not be installed to /boot/efi! Install grub-efi-amd64." > ); > + $boot_ok = 0; > + } > + if (-f "/boot/efi/EFI/BOOT/BOOTX64.efi") { > + log_warn("Removable bootloader found at '/boot/efi/EFI/BOOT/BOOTX64.efi' Check the" > + . " output of `proxmox-boot-tool refresh` if further action is needed."); why not run the debconf command here? we already did 90% of the required checks if we end up here: 1. system is EFI booted 2. removable entry on ESP exists 3: MISSING: `debconf show --db configdb grub-efi-amd64 grub-pc | grep 'force_efi_extra_removable'` we just need to query debconf to see if action actually needs to be taken. without that last step, this will now warn *for all LVM systems*, even those that are properly set up.. if we want to go the extra mile, we could also check that the binaries actually match what is currently installed package-wise, but that might get complicated in the face of shim.. > + $boot_ok = 0; this is dead code > return; or this is, please only do either ;) > - } else { > + } > + if ($boot_ok) { > log_pass("bootloader packages installed correctly"); > } > } > -- > 2.39.5 > > > > _______________________________________________ > pve-devel mailing list > pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com > https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel > > > _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel