Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.debian.user > #191444 > unrolled thread

Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9

Started byNicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com>
First post2018-01-23 22:10 +0100
Last post2018-01-25 23:40 +0100
Articles 20 on this page of 64 — 14 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user


Contents

  Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2018-01-23 22:10 +0100
    Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> - 2018-01-23 22:20 +0100
      Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2018-01-23 22:40 +0100
        Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> - 2018-01-23 22:40 +0100
      Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-23 23:10 +0100
        Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-23 23:50 +0100
          Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Richard Hector <richard@walnut.gen.nz> - 2018-01-24 00:00 +0100
            Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2018-01-24 00:10 +0100
              Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2018-01-24 11:20 +0100
                Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2018-01-24 17:10 +0100
                  Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2018-01-24 19:20 +0100
            Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2018-01-24 00:10 +0100
              Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2018-01-24 00:20 +0100
                Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Richard Hector <richard@walnut.gen.nz> - 2018-01-24 02:20 +0100
            Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-24 12:20 +0100
              Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-24 12:40 +0100
                Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-24 13:10 +0100
                  Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-24 13:50 +0100
                    Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> - 2018-01-24 14:10 +0100
                      Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-24 14:30 +0100
                        Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> - 2018-01-24 14:50 +0100
                          Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2018-01-24 15:20 +0100
                            Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-24 15:40 +0100
                              Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-24 17:10 +0100
                                Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-24 17:30 +0100
                                Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2018-01-24 17:30 +0100
                                  Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-24 18:10 +0100
                                    Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2018-01-24 18:30 +0100
                                    Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2018-01-24 18:40 +0100
                                      Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-24 19:10 +0100
                                      Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-24 19:20 +0100
                                        Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-24 19:40 +0100
                                          Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-24 21:30 +0100
                                            Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Lange <klappnase@freenet.de> - 2018-01-24 23:40 +0100
                                              Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-25 02:00 +0100
                                                Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-25 10:40 +0100
                                                  Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Lange <klappnase@freenet.de> - 2018-01-25 11:00 +0100
                                                    Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-25 13:00 +0100
                                                      Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-25 14:00 +0100
                                                        Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2018-01-25 14:10 +0100
                                                          Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-25 14:40 +0100
                                                            Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-25 17:20 +0100
                                                              Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Lange <klappnase@freenet.de> - 2018-01-25 18:30 +0100
                                                                Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-25 19:40 +0100
                                                                  Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-25 19:50 +0100
                                                                    Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Lange <klappnase@freenet.de> - 2018-01-25 22:00 +0100
                                                                  Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2018-01-25 20:30 +0100
                                                                    Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-25 22:00 +0100
                                                              Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-25 18:40 +0100
                                                                Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Lange <klappnase@freenet.de> - 2018-01-25 22:10 +0100
                                                                  Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-25 23:10 +0100
                                                                    Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-25 23:30 +0100
                                                                      Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-25 23:40 +0100
                                                                    Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Lange <klappnase@freenet.de> - 2018-01-25 23:40 +0100
                                                                      Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-26 00:10 +0100
                                                                        Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Lange <klappnase@freenet.de> - 2018-01-26 00:20 +0100
                                  Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2018-01-24 18:30 +0100
                                  Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2018-01-25 15:30 +0100
                                    Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2018-01-25 15:40 +0100
                                      Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2018-01-25 16:10 +0100
                                      Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2018-01-25 23:20 +0100
                                  Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Jochen Spieker <ml@well-adjusted.de> - 2018-01-25 21:30 +0100
                                    Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Sven Joachim <svenjoac@gmx.de> - 2018-01-25 21:40 +0100
                                    Re: Question on CVE-2017-5754 on Debian 8.9 Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2018-01-25 23:40 +0100

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →


#191481

FromSven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de>
Date2018-01-24 14:50 +0100
Message-ID<vbtB7-ol-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#191480
Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 24 January 2018 at 12:58, Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> wrote:

>> Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> wrote:

>> > The link within the above one:
>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2018-01/msg00148.html
>>> also has a link to the ftp download for the release candidate version of
>>> gcc 7.3 ie 7.3.0rc1 which does actually work for spectre and retpoline.

>> Debian Sid got gcc-7.3.0rc2 last night, the package is still named gcc-7
>> (7.2.0-20) though.


> Does that mean that if you upgrade to sid and installed gcc 7.2.0 you
> would actually get 7.3.0rc2 in practice?

Unless I interpret the changelog wrong: yes.

> If so then you would then go ahead and manually compile kernel 4.14.14
> and you would be straight.

Could be, yes.

Grüße,
Sven.

-- 
Sigmentation fault. Core dumped.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#191482

FromVincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net>
Date2018-01-24 15:20 +0100
Message-ID<vbu49-Or-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#191481
On 2018-01-24 14:44:18 +0100, Sven Hartge wrote:
> Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 24 January 2018 at 12:58, Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> wrote:
> 
> >> Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> >> > The link within the above one:
> >>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2018-01/msg00148.html
> >>> also has a link to the ftp download for the release candidate version of
> >>> gcc 7.3 ie 7.3.0rc1 which does actually work for spectre and retpoline.
> 
> >> Debian Sid got gcc-7.3.0rc2 last night, the package is still named gcc-7
> >> (7.2.0-20) though.
> 
> > Does that mean that if you upgrade to sid and installed gcc 7.2.0 you
> > would actually get 7.3.0rc2 in practice?
> 
> Unless I interpret the changelog wrong: yes.

But the changelogs don't mention anything about Spectre and retpoline.

-- 
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#191483

FromMichael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com>
Date2018-01-24 15:40 +0100
Message-ID<vbunv-Uy-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#191482

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 24 January 2018 at 14:11, Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> wrote:

> On 2018-01-24 14:44:18 +0100, Sven Hartge wrote:
> > Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 24 January 2018 at 12:58, Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> wrote:
> >
> > >> Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >> > The link within the above one:
> > >>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2018-01/msg00148.html
> > >>> also has a link to the ftp download for the release candidate
> version of
> > >>> gcc 7.3 ie 7.3.0rc1 which does actually work for spectre and
> retpoline.
> >
> > >> Debian Sid got gcc-7.3.0rc2 last night, the package is still named
> gcc-7
> > >> (7.2.0-20) though.
> >
> > > Does that mean that if you upgrade to sid and installed gcc 7.2.0 you
> > > would actually get 7.3.0rc2 in practice?
> >
> > Unless I interpret the changelog wrong: yes.
>
> But the changelogs don't mention anything about Spectre and retpoline.
>

​It's OK.  As long as you really do end up installing gcc 7.3.0 rc2 we know
it can handle the compilation of kernel 4.14.14 correctly to
make the KPTI and retpoline patches work...........

So the changelog doesn't matter.

Cheers

MF​



>
> --
> Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/>
> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#191488

FromMichael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com>
Date2018-01-24 17:10 +0100
Message-ID<vbvMC-1W9-17@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#191483

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 24 January 2018 at 14:15, Michael Fothergill <
michael.fothergill@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On 24 January 2018 at 14:11, Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> wrote:
>
>> On 2018-01-24 14:44:18 +0100, Sven Hartge wrote:
>> > Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > On 24 January 2018 at 12:58, Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> wrote:
>> >
>> > >> Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > >> > The link within the above one:
>> > >>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2018-01/msg00148.html
>> > >>> also has a link to the ftp download for the release candidate
>> version of
>> > >>> gcc 7.3 ie 7.3.0rc1 which does actually work for spectre and
>> retpoline.
>> >
>> > >> Debian Sid got gcc-7.3.0rc2 last night, the package is still named
>> gcc-7
>> > >> (7.2.0-20) though.
>> >
>> > > Does that mean that if you upgrade to sid and installed gcc 7.2.0 you
>> > > would actually get 7.3.0rc2 in practice?
>> >
>> > Unless I interpret the changelog wrong: yes.
>>
>

​I have found a kernel image file here:

​https://packages.debian.org/experimental/linux-image-4.15.0-rc8-amd64

I think this will likely work OK with KPTI and retpoline.

It's in debian experimental.

If you can be sid and experimental together then I guess you can have gcc
7.3 rc1 or 2 (or whatever it is) installed and then
install the image as a kernel upgrade not a kernel compilation:

Something like this:

 # cat >> /etc/apt/preferences << EOF Package: * Pin: release
o=Debian,a=experimental Pin-Priority: 102 EOF # apt-cache policy   #
shows/verifies the current preferences # echo "deb
http://deb.debian.org/debian experimental main" >>
/etc/apt/sources.list # apt-get update # apt-get -t experimental
install linux-image-3.10-rc5-686-pae




Except here you would do:

# apt-get -t experimental install linux-image-4.15.0-rc8-amd64

Then I would have thought KPTI and retpoline would be installed in a
relatively painless way if you don't mind running as sid.

Cheers

MF









>
>> But the changelogs don't mention anything about Spectre and retpoline.
>>
>
> ​It's OK.  As long as you really do end up installing gcc 7.3.0 rc2 we
> know it can handle the compilation of kernel 4.14.14 correctly to
> make the KPTI and retpoline patches work...........
>
> So the changelog doesn't matter.
>
> Cheers
>
> MF​
>
>
>
>>
>> --
>> Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/>
>> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
>> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
>>
>>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#191489

FromMichael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com>
Date2018-01-24 17:30 +0100
Message-ID<vbw5X-221-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#191488

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 24 January 2018 at 15:49, Michael Fothergill <
michael.fothergill@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On 24 January 2018 at 14:15, Michael Fothergill <
> michael.fothergill@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 24 January 2018 at 14:11, Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2018-01-24 14:44:18 +0100, Sven Hartge wrote:
>>> > Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > > On 24 January 2018 at 12:58, Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > >> Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > >> > The link within the above one:
>>> > >>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2018-01/msg00148.html
>>> > >>> also has a link to the ftp download for the release candidate
>>> version of
>>> > >>> gcc 7.3 ie 7.3.0rc1 which does actually work for spectre and
>>> retpoline.
>>> >
>>> > >> Debian Sid got gcc-7.3.0rc2 last night, the package is still named
>>> gcc-7
>>> > >> (7.2.0-20) though.
>>> >
>>> > > Does that mean that if you upgrade to sid and installed gcc 7.2.0 you
>>> > > would actually get 7.3.0rc2 in practice?
>>> >
>>> > Unless I interpret the changelog wrong: yes.
>>>
>>
>
> ​I have found a kernel image file here:
>
> ​https://packages.debian.org/experimental/linux-image-4.15.0-rc8-amd64
>
> I think this will likely work OK with KPTI and retpoline.
>
> It's in debian experimental.
>
> If you can be sid and experimental together then I guess you can have gcc
> 7.3 rc1 or 2 (or whatever it is) installed and then
> install the image as a kernel upgrade not a kernel compilation:
>
> Something like this:
>
>  # cat >> /etc/apt/preferences << EOF Package: * Pin: release o=Debian,a=experimental Pin-Priority: 102 EOF # apt-cache policy   # shows/verifies the current preferences # echo "deb http://deb.debian.org/debian experimental main" >> /etc/apt/sources.list # apt-get update # apt-get -t experimental install linux-image-3.10-rc5-686-pae
>
>
>
>
> Except here you would do:
>
> # apt-get -t experimental install linux-image-4.15.0-rc8-amd64
>
> Then I would have thought KPTI and retpoline would be installed in a
> relatively painless way if you don't mind running as sid.
>
> Cheers
>
> MF
>

​Wait a minute.  If the linux image kernel is a binary ie compiled then as
long as it was compiled using a gcc compiler v 7.3 or greater
then the retpoline and KPTI would correctly installed by default.

So, if my understanding is correct then would that not mean you would not
need to have v 7.3 of gcc installed locally so you would
not need to become sid?

Just a thought.

MF





​



>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>> But the changelogs don't mention anything about Spectre and retpoline.
>>>
>>
>> ​It's OK.  As long as you really do end up installing gcc 7.3.0 rc2 we
>> know it can handle the compilation of kernel 4.14.14 correctly to
>> make the KPTI and retpoline patches work...........
>>
>> So the changelog doesn't matter.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> MF​
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/>
>>> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
>>> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
>>>
>>>
>>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#191490

FromGreg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org>
Date2018-01-24 17:30 +0100
Message-ID<vbw5Y-221-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#191488
On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 03:49:08PM +0000, Michael Fothergill wrote:
> If you can be sid and experimental together then I guess [...]

Experimental is not a release.  You can't "be experimental".  It is
merely a place where individual packages are uploaded, when they are
considered "not ready to be in unstable yet".

Typically the package maintainer EXPECTS these packages to have bugs,
and wants focused help from people who are familiar with the package
to find and squish them.  Or, the package may be uploaded in a "known
broken" condition because it could still be useful in highly specialized
circumstances, where the new features outweigh the known bugs.

The packages in experimental do NOT automatically migrate into unstable
or testing.  They are not part of the normal package lifecycle.

To use a package from experimental, you must download it directly, and
install it directly.  You don't use apt or its cousins, unless it's
to backfill dependencies (apt-get -f install) from your actual release.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#191492

FromMichael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com>
Date2018-01-24 18:10 +0100
Message-ID<vbwIF-2vu-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#191490

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 24 January 2018 at 16:19, Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 03:49:08PM +0000, Michael Fothergill wrote:
> > If you can be sid and experimental together then I guess [...]
>
> Experimental is not a release.  You can't "be experimental".  It is
> merely a place where individual packages are uploaded, when they are
> considered "not ready to be in unstable yet".
>
> Typically the package maintainer EXPECTS these packages to have bugs,
> and wants focused help from people who are familiar with the package
> to find and squish them.  Or, the package may be uploaded in a "known
> broken" condition because it could still be useful in highly specialized
> circumstances, where the new features outweigh the known bugs.
>
> The packages in experimental do NOT automatically migrate into unstable
> or testing.  They are not part of the normal package lifecycle.
>
> To use a package from experimental, you must download it directly, and
> install it directly.  You don't use apt or its cousins, unless it's
> to backfill dependencies (apt-get -f install) from your actual release.
>

​I fired up Debian stretch here and ran the following:​


​r​
oot@mikef-PC:/etc/apt# apt-get update
Ign:1 http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian stretch InRelease
Hit:2 http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian stretch Release
Hit:3 http://security.debian.org stretch/updates InRelease
Reading package lists... Done
root@mikef-PC:/etc/apt# apt-get -t experimental install
linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-amd64
Reading package lists... Done

​and got the following error:​


E: The value 'experimental' is invalid for APT::Default-Release as such a
release is not available in the sources

​Mysources file looks like this:​


root@mikef-PC:/etc/apt# more sources.list
#



###### Debian Main Repos
deb http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian/ stretch main experimental contrib
non-free

###### Debian Update Repos
deb http://security.debian.org/ stretch/updates main contrib non-free

deb-src http://security.debian.org/ stretch/updates main contrib non-free


root@mikef-PC:/etc/apt#



Is the error caused by me trying to run apt at all here ie I should use
some other command to install the linux image file?

Comments appreciated.

Michael Fothergill​

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#191496

FromThe Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm>
Date2018-01-24 18:30 +0100
Message-ID<vbx21-2CG-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#191492

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 2018-01-24 at 11:51, Michael Fothergill wrote:

> ​I fired up Debian stretch here and ran the following:​
> 
> 
> ​r​
> oot@mikef-PC:/etc/apt# apt-get update
> Ign:1 http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian stretch InRelease
> Hit:2 http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian stretch Release
> Hit:3 http://security.debian.org stretch/updates InRelease
> Reading package lists... Done
> root@mikef-PC:/etc/apt# apt-get -t experimental install
> linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-amd64
> Reading package lists... Done
> 
> ​and got the following error:​
> 
> 
> E: The value 'experimental' is invalid for APT::Default-Release as such a
> release is not available in the sources
> 
> ​Mysources file looks like this:​
> 
> 
> root@mikef-PC:/etc/apt# more sources.list
> #
> 
> 
> 
> ###### Debian Main Repos
> deb http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian/ stretch main experimental contrib
> non-free

stretch is a suite; more specifically, it is a codename for something
that used to be AKA "stable".

main, contrib, and non-free are components within stretch.

experimental is not part of stable, testing, or unstable. It is its own
suite. It goes in place of 'stretch' in the line, not into the list of
components after the suite.


As the (badly line-wrapped) script from a few posts ago would indicate,
you need a line reading something like

deb http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian/ experimental main contrib non-free

-- 
   The Wanderer

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
progress depends on the unreasonable man.         -- George Bernard Shaw

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#191497

FromGreg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org>
Date2018-01-24 18:40 +0100
Message-ID<vbxbI-2FS-21@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#191492
On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 04:51:35PM +0000, Michael Fothergill wrote:
> root@mikef-PC:/etc/apt# apt-get -t experimental install
> linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-amd64
> Reading package lists... Done
> 
> ​and got the following error:​
> 
> 
> E: The value 'experimental' is invalid for APT::Default-Release as such a
> release is not available in the sources

Just get the package(s) directly from
http://packages.debian.org/experimental/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#191498

FromMichael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com>
Date2018-01-24 19:10 +0100
Message-ID<vbxEK-34D-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#191497

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 24 January 2018 at 17:38, Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 04:51:35PM +0000, Michael Fothergill wrote:
> > root@mikef-PC:/etc/apt# apt-get -t experimental install
> > linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-amd64
> > Reading package lists... Done
> >
> > ​and got the following error:​
> >
> >
> > E: The value 'experimental' is invalid for APT::Default-Release as such a
> > release is not available in the sources
>
> Just get the package(s) directly from
> http://packages.debian.org/experimental/


​and then use dpkg -i or abracadbra?

Cheers

MF

​

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#191499

FromMichael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com>
Date2018-01-24 19:20 +0100
Message-ID<vbxOp-37L-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#191497

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 24 January 2018 at 17:38, Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 04:51:35PM +0000, Michael Fothergill wrote:
> > root@mikef-PC:/etc/apt# apt-get -t experimental install
> > linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-amd64
> > Reading package lists... Done
> >
> > ​and got the following error:​
> >
> >
> > E: The value 'experimental' is invalid for APT::Default-Release as such a
> > release is not available in the sources
>
> Just get the package(s) directly from
> http://packages.debian.org/experimental/


​I did it and installed it with dpkg -i


/home/mikef/Downloads
mikef@mikef-PC:~/Downloads$ su
Password:
root@mikef-PC:/home/mikef/Downloads# ls
05_Debeche_EnzymeMicrobTech.pdf
climostat-slides-2017.pptx
GB2506880A.pdf
Gentoo-Linux-livedvd-amd64-multilib-20160704
Gmail - New Substances Notification.pdf
Gmail-New-Substances-Notification.pdf
linux-image-4.15.0-rc8-amd64_4.15~rc8-1~exp1_amd64.deb
python-pyqtgraph_0.10.0-1_all.deb
root@mikef-PC:/home/mikef/Downloads# dpkg -i
linux-image-4.15.0-rc8-amd64_4.15~rc8-1~exp1_amd64.deb
(Reading database ... 222960 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to unpack linux-image-4.15.0-rc8-amd64_4.15~rc8-1~exp1_amd64.deb
...
Unpacking linux-image-4.15.0-rc8-amd64 (4.15~rc8-1~exp1) over
(4.15~rc8-1~exp1) ...
Setting up linux-image-4.15.0-rc8-amd64 (4.15~rc8-1~exp1) ...
/etc/kernel/postinst.d/dkms:
Error! Your kernel headers for kernel 4.15.0-rc8-amd64 cannot be found.
Please install the linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-amd64 package,
or use the --kernelsourcedir option to tell DKMS where it's located
/etc/kernel/postinst.d/initramfs-tools:
update-initramfs: Generating /boot/initrd.img-4.15.0-rc8-amd64
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8107e-2.fw for module
r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8107e-1.fw for module
r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8168h-2.fw for module
r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8168h-1.fw for module
r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8168g-3.fw for module
r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8168g-2.fw for module
r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8106e-2.fw for module
r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8106e-1.fw for module
r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8411-2.fw for module
r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8411-1.fw for module
r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8402-1.fw for module
r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8168f-2.fw for module
r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8168f-1.fw for module
r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8105e-1.fw for module
r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8168e-3.fw for module
r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8168e-2.fw for module
r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8168e-1.fw for module
r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8168d-2.fw for module
r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8168d-1.fw for module
r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/radeon/banks_k_2_smc.bin for
module radeon
/etc/kernel/postinst.d/zz-update-grub:
Generating grub configuration file ...
Found background image: /usr/share/images/desktop-base/desktop-grub.png
Found linux image: /boot/vmlinuz-4.15.0-rc8-amd64
Found initrd image: /boot/initrd.img-4.15.0-rc8-amd64
Found linux image: /boot/vmlinuz-4.9.0-4-amd64
Found initrd image: /boot/initrd.img-4.9.0-4-amd64
Found linux image: /boot/vmlinuz-4.9.0-3-amd64
Found initrd image: /boot/initrd.img-4.9.0-3-amd64
Found linux image: /boot/vmlinuz-3.16.0-4-amd64
Found initrd image: /boot/initrd.img-3.16.0-4-amd64
Found memtest86+ image: /boot/memtest86+.bin
Found memtest86+ multiboot image: /boot/memtest86+_multiboot.bin
Found Windows 10 on /dev/sda1
Found Windows 10 on /dev/sda2
Found Gentoo/Linux on /dev/sda8
done
root@mikef-PC:/home/mikef/Downloads#


There is a gripe in there about the linux headers file not being installed
for it.

There is a linux header file on the experimental web page.

I think I need to install that as well.

Cheers

MF








​

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#191502

FromMichael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com>
Date2018-01-24 19:40 +0100
Message-ID<vby7M-3fx-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#191499

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 24 January 2018 at 18:00, Michael Fothergill <
michael.fothergill@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
>
>
>
>
> W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8105e-1.fw for
> module r8169
>
>
> There is a gripe in there about the linux headers file not being installed
> for it.
>
> There is a linux header file on the experimental web page.
>
> I think I need to install that as well.
>

​I tried installing the headers file and it says I have dependency
problems:​


root@mikef-PC:/home/mikef/Downloads# dpkg -i
linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-amd64_4.15~rc8-1~exp1_amd64.deb
Selecting previously unselected package linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-amd64.
(Reading database ... 222960 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to unpack
linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-amd64_4.15~rc8-1~exp1_amd64.deb ...
Unpacking linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-amd64 (4.15~rc8-1~exp1) ...
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of
linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-amd64:
 linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-amd64 depends on
linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-amd64 (= 4.15~rc8-1~exp1); however:
  Package linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-amd64 is not installed.

​It almost sounds like some kind of rehab is required here.

Comments appreciated.

Cheers

MF​




>
> Cheers
>
> MF
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ​
>
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#191507

FromMichael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com>
Date2018-01-24 21:30 +0100
Message-ID<vbzQd-4ml-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#191502

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 24 January 2018 at 18:12, Michael Fothergill <
michael.fothergill@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On 24 January 2018 at 18:00, Michael Fothergill <
> michael.fothergill@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8105e-1.fw for
>> module r8169
>>
>>
>> There is a gripe in there about the linux headers file not being
>> installed for it.
>>
>> There is a linux header file on the experimental web page.
>>
>> I think I need to install that as well.
>>
>
> ​I tried installing the headers file and it says I have dependency
> problems:​
>
>
> root@mikef-PC:/home/mikef/Downloads# dpkg -i linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-
> amd64_4.15~rc8-1~exp1_amd64.deb
> Selecting previously unselected package linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-
> amd64.
> (Reading database ... 222960 files and directories currently installed.)
> Preparing to unpack linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-
> amd64_4.15~rc8-1~exp1_amd64.deb ...
> Unpacking linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-amd64 (4.15~rc8-1~exp1) ...
> dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of
> linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-amd64:
>  linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-amd64 depends on
> linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-amd64 (= 4.15~rc8-1~exp1); however:
>   Package linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-amd64 is not installed.
>
> ​It almost sounds like some kind of rehab is required here.
>
> Comments appreciated.
>
> Cheers
>
> MF​
>

​It is easier to do this stuff in Gentoo I think.......

It does take a long time to learn but it is worth it.

When the gcc 7.3 build comes out I will upgrade and then use it to
recompile the 4.14.14 kernel.

And it will work.

I will also get the kernels after that and install them in a flash.

Cheers

MF



​



>
>
>
>
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> MF
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ​
>>
>>
>>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#191509

FromMichael Lange <klappnase@freenet.de>
Date2018-01-24 23:40 +0100
Message-ID<vbBS1-5AP-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#191507
Hi,

On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 20:07:07 +0000
Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> wrote:

(...)
> > ​I tried installing the headers file and it says I have dependency
> > problems:​
> >
> >
> > root@mikef-PC:/home/mikef/Downloads# dpkg -i
> > linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all- amd64_4.15~rc8-1~exp1_amd64.deb
> > Selecting previously unselected package linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-
> > amd64.
> > (Reading database ... 222960 files and directories currently
> > installed.) Preparing to unpack linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-
> > amd64_4.15~rc8-1~exp1_amd64.deb ...
> > Unpacking linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-amd64 (4.15~rc8-1~exp1) ...
> > dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of
> > linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-amd64:
> >  linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-amd64 depends on
> > linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-amd64 (= 4.15~rc8-1~exp1); however:
> >   Package linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-amd64 is not installed.
> >
> > ​It almost sounds like some kind of rehab is required here.

no, I don't think so ;)
You just need to do what the error message from dpkg tells you and
download the linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-amd64 package from
https://packages.debian.org/experimental/linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-amd64
and install it along with
linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-amd64_4.15~rc8-1~exp1_amd64.deb

Maybe you stumbled over the similarity between those two packages' names?

Regards

Michael


.-.. .. ...- .   .-.. --- -. --.   .- -. -..   .--. .-. --- ... .--. . .-.

War isn't a good life, but it's life.
		-- Kirk, "A Private Little War", stardate 4211.8

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#191510

FromMichael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com>
Date2018-01-25 02:00 +0100
Message-ID<vbE3v-6Or-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#191509

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 24 January 2018 at 22:32, Michael Lange <klappnase@freenet.de> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 20:07:07 +0000
> Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> (...)
> > > ​I tried installing the headers file and it says I have dependency
> > > problems:​
> > >
> > >
> > > root@mikef-PC:/home/mikef/Downloads# dpkg -i
> > > linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all- amd64_4.15~rc8-1~exp1_amd64.deb
> > > Selecting previously unselected package linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-
> > > amd64.
> > > (Reading database ... 222960 files and directories currently
> > > installed.) Preparing to unpack linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-
> > > amd64_4.15~rc8-1~exp1_amd64.deb ...
> > > Unpacking linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-amd64 (4.15~rc8-1~exp1) ...
> > > dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of
> > > linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-amd64:
> > >  linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-amd64 depends on
> > > linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-amd64 (= 4.15~rc8-1~exp1); however:
> > >   Package linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-amd64 is not installed.
> > >
> > > ​It almost sounds like some kind of rehab is required here.
>
> no, I don't think so ;)
> You just need to do what the error message from dpkg tells you and
> download the linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-amd64 package from
> https://packages.debian.org/experimental/linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-amd64
> and install it along with
> linux-headers-4.15.0-rc8-all-amd64_4.15~rc8-1~exp1_amd64.deb
>
> Maybe you stumbled over the similarity between those two packages' names?
>


​OK,  I installed buster and the other dependencies and gcc 7.2.

When I upgraded then kernel 4.15.0 was installed.

I ran the patch checker:

root@mikef-PC:/home/mikef/spectre-meltdown-checker#
./spectre-meltdown-checker.sh
Spectre and Meltdown mitigation detection tool v0.32

Checking for vulnerabilities on current system
Kernel is Linux 4.15.0-rc8-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 4.15~rc8-1~exp1 (2018-01-15)
x86_64
CPU is AMD A10-7850K Radeon R7, 12 Compute Cores 4C+8G

Hardware check
* Hardware support (CPU microcode) for mitigation techniques
  * Indirect Branch Restricted Speculation (IBRS)
    * SPEC_CTRL MSR is available:  NO
    * CPU indicates IBRS capability:  NO
  * Indirect Branch Prediction Barrier (IBPB)
    * PRED_CMD MSR is available:  NO
    * CPU indicates IBPB capability:  NO
  * Single Thread Indirect Branch Predictors (STIBP)
    * SPEC_CTRL MSR is available:  NO
    * CPU indicates STIBP capability:  NO
  * Enhanced IBRS (IBRS_ALL)
    * CPU indicates ARCH_CAPABILITIES MSR availability:  NO
    * ARCH_CAPABILITIES MSR advertises IBRS_ALL capability:  NO
  * CPU explicitly indicates not being vulnerable to Meltdown (RDCL_NO):
NO
* CPU vulnerability to the three speculative execution attacks variants
  * Vulnerable to Variant 1:  YES
  * Vulnerable to Variant 2:  YES
  * Vulnerable to Variant 3:  NO

CVE-2017-5753 [bounds check bypass] aka 'Spectre Variant 1'
* Mitigated according to the /sys interface:  NO  (kernel confirms your
system is vulnerable)
> STATUS:  VULNERABLE  (Vulnerable)

CVE-2017-5715 [branch target injection] aka 'Spectre Variant 2'
* Mitigated according to the /sys interface:  NO  (kernel confirms your
system is vulnerable)
* Mitigation 1
  * Kernel is compiled with IBRS/IBPB support:  NO
  * Currently enabled features
    * IBRS enabled for Kernel space:  NO
    * IBRS enabled for User space:  NO
    * IBPB enabled:  NO
* Mitigation 2
  * Kernel compiled with retpoline option:  YES
  * Kernel compiled with a retpoline-aware compiler:  NO  (kernel reports
minimal retpoline compilation)
  * Retpoline enabled:  YES
> STATUS:  VULNERABLE  (Vulnerable: Minimal AMD ASM retpoline)

CVE-2017-5754 [rogue data cache load] aka 'Meltdown' aka 'Variant 3'
* Mitigated according to the /sys interface:  YES  (kernel confirms that
your CPU is unaffected)
* Kernel supports Page Table Isolation (PTI):  YES
* PTI enabled and active:  NO
* Running under Xen PV (64 bits):  NO
> STATUS:  NOT VULNERABLE  (your CPU vendor reported your CPU model as not
vulnerable)

A false sense of security is worse than no security at all, see --disclaimer
root@mikef-PC:/home/mikef/spectre-meltdown-checker#


I have the same problem as in Gentoo.

In order to install gcc 7.3 rc2 I think I would need to be sid.


I don't think I want to be sid at present.

Cheers

MF



​



>
> Regards
>
> Michael
>
>
> .-.. .. ...- .   .-.. --- -. --.   .- -. -..   .--. .-. --- ... .--. . .-.
>
> War isn't a good life, but it's life.
>                 -- Kirk, "A Private Little War", stardate 4211.8
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#191514

FromMichael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com>
Date2018-01-25 10:40 +0100
Message-ID<vbMaJ-43Q-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#191510

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

>
>
> I have the same problem as in Gentoo.
>
> In order to install gcc 7.3 rc2 I think I would need to be sid.
>
>
> I don't think I want to be sid at present.
>

​But if I did want to be sid, would a source file like this suffice:

​
deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian/ unstable main contrib non-free
deb-src http://http.us.debian.org/debian/ unstable main contrib non-free

​or do I need more?

​If I become sid then I think I would just install the gcc version above
the one I have and  then reinstall
the 4.15.0 kernel and maybe I would have the full kernel patch.............

Comments appreciated,




>
> Cheers
>
> MF
>
>
>
> ​
>
>
>
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>
>> .-.. .. ...- .   .-.. --- -. --.   .- -. -..   .--. .-. --- ... .--. . .-.
>>
>> War isn't a good life, but it's life.
>>                 -- Kirk, "A Private Little War", stardate 4211.8
>>
>>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#191517

FromMichael Lange <klappnase@freenet.de>
Date2018-01-25 11:00 +0100
Message-ID<vbMu6-4do-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#191514
Hi,

On Thu, 25 Jan 2018 09:15:59 +0000
Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> wrote:

> >
> >
> > I have the same problem as in Gentoo.
> >
> > In order to install gcc 7.3 rc2 I think I would need to be sid.
> >
> >
> > I don't think I want to be sid at present.
> >
> 
> ​But if I did want to be sid, would a source file like this suffice:
> 
> ​
> deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian/ unstable main contrib non-free
> deb-src http://http.us.debian.org/debian/ unstable main contrib non-free
> 
> ​or do I need more?
> 
> ​If I become sid then I think I would just install the gcc version above
> the one I have and  then reinstall
> the 4.15.0 kernel and maybe I would have the full kernel
> patch.............

hmm, I don't think installing the latest compiler does any good if you
install a kernel package that was compiled with an older compiler version.

And from a quick glance it looks like sid still has only gcc-7.2 .
There is a gcc-8 package in experimental though; from again a quick
glance at the dependencies it surely won't easily install on stretch but
it might be worth a try if it installs on buster.
Then I guess you would have to compile the kernel from source, which
actually isn't too hard with make-kpkg (however I never tried to force
make-kpkg to use a certain, non-system-default compiler, but that's surely
possible).

Regards

Michael


.-.. .. ...- .   .-.. --- -. --.   .- -. -..   .--. .-. --- ... .--. . .-.

Every living thing wants to survive.
		-- Spock, "The Ultimate Computer", stardate 4731.3

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#191521

FromMichael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com>
Date2018-01-25 13:00 +0100
Message-ID<vbOmd-5qu-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#191517

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 25 January 2018 at 09:50, Michael Lange <klappnase@freenet.de> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 25 Jan 2018 09:15:59 +0000
> Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >
> > >
> > > I have the same problem as in Gentoo.
> > >
> > > In order to install gcc 7.3 rc2 I think I would need to be sid.
> > >
> > >
> > > I don't think I want to be sid at present.
> > >
> >
> > ​But if I did want to be sid, would a source file like this suffice:
> >
> > ​
> > deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian/ unstable main contrib non-free
> > deb-src http://http.us.debian.org/debian/ unstable main contrib non-free
> >
> > ​or do I need more?
> >
> > ​If I become sid then I think I would just install the gcc version above
> > the one I have and  then reinstall
> > the 4.15.0 kernel and maybe I would have the full kernel
> > patch.............
>
> hmm, I don't think installing the latest compiler does any good if you
> install a kernel package that was compiled with an older compiler version.
>
> And from a quick glance it looks like sid still has only gcc-7.2 .
> There is a gcc-8 package in experimental though; from again a quick
> glance at the dependencies it surely won't easily install on stretch but
> it might be worth a try if it installs on buster.
>

​I tried installing gcc 8 on buster.   It needs cpp8 which needs ​libmrpfr6

ie this

https://packages.debian.org/unstable/main/libmpfr6

which looks like its about being sid again.​


​I need to go to dependency rehab and sing the dem bones song again.

Suggestions on avoiding becoming sid/krankenhaus/unstable/12 step program
welcome.

Regards

MF


 ​


> Then I guess you would have to compile the kernel from source, which
> actually isn't too hard with make-kpkg (however I never tried to force
> make-kpkg to use a certain, non-system-default compiler, but that's surely
> possible).
>
> Regards
>
> Michael
>
>
> .-.. .. ...- .   .-.. --- -. --.   .- -. -..   .--. .-. --- ... .--. . .-.
>
> Every living thing wants to survive.
>                 -- Spock, "The Ultimate Computer", stardate 4731.3
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#191526

FromMichael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com>
Date2018-01-25 14:00 +0100
Message-ID<vbPih-60X-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#191521

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

>>
> ​I tried installing gcc 8 on buster.   It needs cpp8 which needs
> ​libmrpfr6
>
> ie this
>
> https://packages.debian.org/unstable/main/libmpfr6
>
> which looks like its about being sid again.​
>
>
> ​I need to go to dependency rehab and sing the dem bones song again.
>
> Suggestions on avoiding becoming sid/krankenhaus/unstable/12 step program
> welcome.
>
> Regards
>
> MF
>

​If I become sid and install the kernel correctly, could I go back to being
just buster (sounds like an energy drink) and carry on using the new kernel?

Cheers

MF



​


>
>
>  ​
>
>
>> Then I guess you would have to compile the kernel from source, which
>> actually isn't too hard with make-kpkg (however I never tried to force
>> make-kpkg to use a certain, non-system-default compiler, but that's surely
>> possible).
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>
>> .-.. .. ...- .   .-.. --- -. --.   .- -. -..   .--. .-. --- ... .--. . .-.
>>
>> Every living thing wants to survive.
>>                 -- Spock, "The Ultimate Computer", stardate 4731.3
>>
>>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#191527

FromGreg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org>
Date2018-01-25 14:10 +0100
Message-ID<vbPrY-6kd-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#191526
On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 12:36:46PM +0000, Michael Fothergill wrote:
> ​If I become sid and install the kernel correctly, could I go back to being
> just buster (sounds like an energy drink) and carry on using the new kernel?

No.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user


csiph-web