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)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A0AB730AE for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 18:16:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 0949E11BF3 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 18:15:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp-out-84.di.u-psud.fr (smtp-out-84.di.u-psud.fr [129.175.213.84]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 82B6811BE8 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 18:15:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp-out-2.di.u-psud.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp-out-2.di.u-psud.fr (UPS-MTA-OUT) with ESMTP id 4FL6yv1ht8z1BRB for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 18:15:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pmx2.di.u-psud.fr (pmx2.di.u-psud.fr [129.175.212.153]) by smtp-out-2.di.u-psud.fr (UPS-MTA-OUT) with ESMTP id 4FL6yv1WgNzbgZy for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 18:15:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp-in-2.di.u-psud.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (UPS-PMX) with SMTP id 4FL6yv1QqRz1qr9m for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 18:15:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [129.175.212.70] (smtps.u-psud.fr [129.175.212.70]) (UPS-MTA) (Authenticated sender: alain.pean via 192.168.71.7) with ESMTPSA id 4FL6yt6BJYzHS for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 18:15:50 +0200 (CEST) Reply-To: alain.pean@c2n.upsaclay.fr To: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com References: <5c3d06aa-1bf8-ca1b-e826-3d2615685b9d@riminilug.it> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Alain_P=c3=a9an?= Message-ID: Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2021 18:15:29 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5c3d06aa-1bf8-ca1b-e826-3d2615685b9d@riminilug.it> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: fr Authentication-Results: smtps.u-psud.fr; auth=pass smtp.auth=alain.pean smtp.mailfrom=alain.pean@c2n.upsaclay.fr X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4FL6yt6BJYzHS X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.000 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY 1 Sending domain does not have any anti-forgery methods NICE_REPLY_A -0.001 Looks like a legit reply (A) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_NONE 0.001 SPF: sender does not publish an SPF Record UNPARSEABLE_RELAY 0.001 Informational: message has unparseable relay lines Subject: Re: [PVE-User] Edit: Boot Order mask 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, 14 Apr 2021 16:16:28 -0000 Le 14/04/2021 à 09:37, Piviul a écrit : > I Alain, first of all thank you very much indeed to you and to all > people answered this thread. I reply your message but the infos here > should answer even the infos asked from Alwin... > > I send directly the output differences from the command pveversion > with -v flag because all three nodes show the same > "pve-manager/6.3-6/2184247e (running kernel: 5.4.106-1-pve)" version. > > So I have launched the following command in all three nodes: > > # pveversion -v > pveversion.$(hostname) > > obtaining 3 differents files and I've done the diff between the first > two files (referring to pve01 and pve02) and as expected there is no > difference: > > $ diff pveversion.pve0{1,2} > > Then I have done the diff between the first and the third node and > this is the result: > > $ diff pveversion.pve0{1,3} > 5d4 > < pve-kernel-5.3: 6.1-6 > 8,9c7 > < pve-kernel-5.3.18-3-pve: 5.3.18-3 > < pve-kernel-5.3.10-1-pve: 5.3.10-1 > --- > > pve-kernel-5.4.34-1-pve: 5.4.34-2 > > there are some little differences yes but in kernel that are not in > use any more (in all 3 nodes uname -r shows 5.4.106-1-pve)... > > Attached you can find all three files hoping the system doesn't cut them. > > Please can I ask you if you have a 6.3 node in your installations that > was previously in 6.2 version (i.e. not installed directly in 6.3 > version)? Can you tell me if the "Boot order" musk is the one with > only combo boxes or the more evoluted drag and drop musk? Hi Piviul, I don't think only a difference in kernel could explain this difference in the web interface, if the other packages are the same. Did you try to clear the cache in your web browsers ? The attached files are indeed there. I looked at the versions, and all three appears up to date, so for me, the only origin that I can suppose could be the browser cache. Alain -- Administrateur Système/Réseau C2N Centre de Nanosciences et Nanotechnologies (UMR 9001) Boulevard Thomas Gobert (ex Avenue de La Vauve), 91120 Palaiseau Tel : 01-70-27-06-88 Bureau A255