From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D39C6EB94 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 14:11:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 572C910C15 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 14:11:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-lf1-x135.google.com (mail-lf1-x135.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::135]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id B365410BEB for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 14:11:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-lf1-x135.google.com with SMTP id p38so52572607lfa.0 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 05:11:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tecnetmza-com-ar.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=h0PNsvk1o6RSrHodCIL+wr1sRmwM6F3fjVevoVY1sZs=; b=YT+DIbLYSXaHU9DYMutQFP6hwMQvDafBl+RIyH64tQWvBUcGOv2GR92EyIv9mS3r3M nrMZ13zsFZSEkMty+CqfkopKaK0ZkuUfkjYHM9lR6Cwga54hOx0MDrC7pqEXa96Wh6ab Weup3TTiQ2T/PXLSDE3MPtZmzgVOSlQgJ2beDy6sM0WMHZzEfJe19IAus7HPFgnhuYDO JIF1aSYDqUn/xp5Wbmcsbg8r/pJ+D9Uk6p4C3zCMBuhMK7uhY+F9GgrNB0fWBqaIBKDH Mwy0HW4RaMhdwUgmnjLnOKuxw4I298FygLROxkDoG2up2v3tK8Zb5Qufv3WkDOGXr+BD 4zBg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=h0PNsvk1o6RSrHodCIL+wr1sRmwM6F3fjVevoVY1sZs=; b=mfMgO1ZYNxx7YBFN0H8w0dJiahAx9gHYewnRUSh4WMTL53jggDG/fAYtWf4lvh21Hr BQRIwDmFp0RXa4s92QC7VLQGO1BFKZsr27f3LVAAR5BKUxMS3z7ax15vbL7mv1XJwPr7 HNV8Ouh+VmmkaI0hpXmYpfykKOlr6aDzKeUEhQI5KTGy0Csvq8tLww6/FXJNmC4z1SSd 4J4u38VgysK4Syq4yp2WQEcK2csniV8SbbCDiT7h8EgyVHg/necl9O9x9nPDCP6Baw7q r4p2l46ebV29RB7KkvDQJbC6/fCxqQy9hDfjY676MlWQIdariogR1+m0y0ubnzAFtt6/ oqvQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530RXTLlowQOiVhpGRkSJ0rsfAe4fDS6OUXJNnVEKkv2suFhsjv7 QtqhgLGd4POMlwEmwNnnyYYrUwJIboilZ4AHBt5r X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz4G6Cb6yZrJlVw8YNr3UJ1hq+X+HxYNf9DLQ2D4PVHbdWvgWzN+r9//5RWOaxa/XqbJliqQvfIipfSXGd8Rko= X-Received: by 2002:a19:5f04:: with SMTP id t4mr32257217lfb.297.1629893477032; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 05:11:17 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1aca635b-412d-c199-2382-629b16457939@holub.co.at> In-Reply-To: <1aca635b-412d-c199-2382-629b16457939@holub.co.at> From: Leandro Roggerone Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2021 09:11:09 -0300 Message-ID: To: Martin Holub Cc: Proxmox VE user list X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 1.113 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature HTML_MESSAGE 0.001 HTML included in message RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE -0.0001 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, no trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_SOFTFAIL 0.665 SPF: sender does not match SPF record (softfail) T_REMOTE_IMAGE 0.01 Message contains an external image 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] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 Subject: Re: [PVE-User] (no subject) X-BeenThere: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE user list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2021 12:11:28 -0000 ok , guys ... I think I will add a third box but it will take some time. Meanwhile: Currently i'm using following repo: deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian bullseye main contrib deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates main contrib # security updates deb http://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security main contrib I have never run any manual upgrade however the system is running the apt-get update command once a day. a) Does It means I should not try to go back to the buster repo ? b)Since Im still running pve 6 , if It is possible to fix my repolist , wich should I use ? Before I got the update alert I was using this: deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian buster main contrib deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian buster-updates main contrib # security updates deb http://security.debian.org buster/updates main contrib c) Is it possible to confirm if some packages have been upgraded ? So I can decide to whether to go back to buster , keep using bullseye. d) If there is no chance to change the repolist to the proper one , should I disable automatic updates to avoid the system crashes ? Thanks guys. Leandro. Libre de virus. www.avast.com <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> El mar, 24 ago 2021 a las 14:21, Martin Holub () escribi=C3=B3: > Hi Leandro, > > So if you can't schedule a downtime for, at least, some VMs i would add a > 3rd Box. Also in terms of having a valid Quorum a 3rd Box would be a good > thing. > > About the Upgrade, as Alain pointed out, there is no way to accidentially > upgrade, at least if you don't put "bullseye" in the sources.list manuall= y > (like you did, that's why i asked about the Upgrade). So just make shure > you explicitly use "buster", not "stable" or "bullseye" in the Debian rep= o. > If apt still complains about the release change just run an update using > "apt-get update --allow-releaseinfo-change", this should fix things you. = If > you already upgraded some packages from the bullseye repo i would keep > things running as they are for now (obviously nothing broke by now, so > don't touch it...) and start planning the Upgrade to 7.0. The Upgrade to > 7.0 was hassle free for the Clusters i ran it by now. Also telling from > Forum and Mailing Lists, i wouldn't expect any issues as long as you don'= t > have any special setups with PCI passthrough Devices or something like > that. > > Best > Martin > Am 24.08.21 um 17:13 schrieb Leandro Roggerone: > > Hello , Martin. > Im still in pve 6.04. > I was looking at the document you pointed out (Upgrade from 6.x to 7.0) > It is frustrating to see that upgrading is a very difficult process. > My cluster contains 2 servers. > Both are in production , at 50 - 60 % storage and memory capacity so it i= s > not easy for me to create backups and move VMs. > > I will study how to proceed with this update from pve 6 to 7. > Perhaps: > Adding a third new box already running version 7. > Adding a networking storage ? need to check out wich one. > > Meanwhile , until I can go to pve 7 , I think I should upgrate to latest > pve 6 and disable automatic upgrades ... > Do you think it is ok ? > > Thanks for your words!! > Leandro. > > > El mi=C3=A9, 18 ago 2021 a las 14:58, Martin Holub () > escribi=C3=B3: > >> Hi Leandro, >> >> Are you already on PVE7? Otherwise, just changing the Sources to >> Bullseye, i'm pretty shure that this will break things, or at least prod= uce >> unwanted results. If you want to upgrade to Debian Bullseye better check >> https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Upgrade_from_6.x_to_7.0 >> >> Best regards >> Martin >> Am 18.08.21 um 15:19 schrieb Leandro Roggerone: >> >> thanks Martin. >> According to documentation , for a non subscription environment ,this is >> how it should looks like: >> >> root@pve:/etc/apt# cat /etc/apt/sources.list >> deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian bullseye main contrib >> >> deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates main contrib >> >> # security updates >> deb http://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security main >> contrib >> >> After running apt-get update from cli , it did not return any error. >> seems to be working ok now. >> Thanks again. >> Leandro. >> >> El mar, 17 ago 2021 a las 11:44, Martin Holub via pve-user (< >> pve-user@lists.proxmox.com>) escribi=C3=B3: >> >>> >>> >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>> From: Martin Holub >>> To: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com >>> Cc: >>> Bcc: >>> Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 16:43:30 +0200 >>> Subject: Re: [PVE-User] (no subject) >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Aug 14th "Bullseye" was released, therefore Buster moved from >>> "stable" to "oldstable" and Bullseye became the new "stable" Version of >>> Debian. >>> >>> Cheers. >>> Martin >>> >>> Am 17.08.21 um 16:37 schrieb Leandro Roggerone: >>> > root@pve:~# apt-get update >>> > Get:1 http://security.debian.org buster/updates InRelease [65.4 kB] >>> > Get:2 http://ftp.debian.org/debian buster InRelease [122 kB] >>> > Get:3 http://ftp.debian.org/debian buster-updates InRelease [51.9 kB] >>> > Reading package lists... Done >>> > >>> > >>> > E: Repository 'http://security.debian.org buster/updates InRelease' >>> changed >>> > its 'Suite' value from 'stable' to 'oldstable' >>> > N: This must be accepted explicitly before updates for this repositor= y >>> can >>> > be applied. See apt-secure(8) manpage for details. >>> > E: Repository 'http://ftp.debian.org/debian buster InRelease' changed >>> its >>> > 'Suite' value from 'stable' to 'oldstable' >>> > N: This must be accepted explicitly before updates for this repositor= y >>> can >>> > be applied. See apt-secure(8) manpage for details. >>> > E: Repository 'http://ftp.debian.org/debian buster-updates InRelease' >>> > changed its 'Suite' value from 'stable-updates' to 'oldstable-updates= ' >>> > N: This must be accepted explicitly before updates for this repositor= y >>> can >>> > be applied. See apt-secure(8) manpage for details. >>> > >>> > This is my source.list >>> > root@pve:~# cat /etc/apt/sources.list >>> > deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian buster main contrib >>> > >>> > deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian buster-updates main contrib >>> > >>> > # security updates >>> > deb http://security.debian.org buster/updates main contrib >>> > >>> > This was working ok until sat 14. >>> > Any idea ? >>> > Thanks! >>> > >>> > < >>> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=3Demail&utm_source=3Dlink&ut= m_campaign=3Dsig-email&utm_content=3Dwebmail >>> > >>> > Libre >>> > de virus. www.avast.com >>> > < >>> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=3Demail&utm_source=3Dlink&ut= m_campaign=3Dsig-email&utm_content=3Dwebmail >>> > >>> > <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > pve-user mailing list >>> > pve-user@lists.proxmox.com >>> > https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>> From: Martin Holub via pve-user >>> To: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com >>> Cc: Martin Holub >>> Bcc: >>> Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 16:43:30 +0200 >>> Subject: Re: [PVE-User] (no subject) >>> _______________________________________________ >>> pve-user mailing list >>> pve-user@lists.proxmox.com >>> https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user >>> >> >> >> Libre >> de virus. www.avast.com >> >> >>