I understand that this package is no longer supported on the Debian 12 bookworm. Is there an alternative way to enable mail rate limiting? Is there a new implementation coming/considered? What would be the timeline? Thanks! I appreciate your support here.
E: The repository ' bookworm Release' no longer has a Release file.
N: Updating from such a repository can't be done securely, and is therefore disabled by default.
N: See apt-secure(8) manpage for repository creation and user configuration details.
How To Download Debian 12 Bookworm
DOWNLOAD 🔥 https://bltlly.com/2yGApq 🔥
I have spoken with the team who works with linux releases, and they believe they have addressed the root cause of the repository failure. Everything should be working now. If you are still experiencing any issues with the repositories, please let us know and I will pass on that information.
Hm... To be honest I have no idea how this can happen - absolutely new installed OS and Dropbox package from 'zero'?! I just took a look in the install script and there is no something similar. The only things that gets installed, as a repository source there, is the working one. You can take a look in your repositories sources using following command:
Take in mind that the used paths are the default; if you have changed them, correct the command accordingly. All places/files where Dropbox repositories are listed on/in will come up. Usually there should be a single file /etc/apt/sources.list.d/dropbox.list. If other file(s) bring up, find a way to clear Dropbox related lines there. In the file, just mentioned, should be a single line pointing to the working repository. If there is something different, you can override the content using something like following:
The above will set the file content as has to be done by package install script. There all path gets retrieved and used to format similar/equivalent command; here I used the default values. Again, If you have changed something in system configuration, change accordingly the command too. You can do a backup copy in advance, if you want, using following:
I did so, too, and had to jump through a lot of burning rings to keep CRE working. There are several perl incompatibilities, so now I have these obsolete packages lingering around (which could theoretically also be installed on a fresh bookworm installation if you download them from packages.debian.org or add the buster distro to your sources.list):
I am trying to port a CMake based application to torizon.
In order to use the newest packages I wanted to switch to using debian:bookworm as the base container for the SDK. Is there a setting that I can change to switch between bullseye and bookworm?
Also what version of TorizonCore are you using? Our bullseye containers were designed wtih TorizonCore 5 in mind and our bookworm containers were designed for TorizonCore 6. You might be able to mix and match these, but you may run into peculiarities and possible issues.
You are right, I am using the Torizon IDE extension V2. If I create a new single container project it defaults to bookworm. However if I try to import an existing CMake project it gives me four options, all of which are based on bullseye. Any idea how to fix this?
I've noticed that the Label, Origin and Description of the cloud-sdk-bookworm Debian repo have changed to "cloud-sdk-bullseye". Can be viewed here: -sdk-bookworm/Release. They seem to be correct for packages.cloud.google.com/apt/dists/cloud-sdk-bullseye/Release. I only noticed it because an automated build which uses the cloud-sdk:466.0.0-slim Docker image has started failing on "apt update" with:
E: Repository ' cloud-sdk-bookworm InRelease' changed its 'Origin' value from 'cloud-sdk-bookworm' to 'cloud-sdk-bullseye'
E: Repository ' cloud-sdk-bookworm InRelease' changed its 'Label' value from 'cloud-sdk-bookworm' to 'cloud-sdk-bullseye'
N: This must be accepted explicitly before updates for this repository can be applied. See apt-secure(8) manpage for details.
As for the info for others how I temporary "fixed it" - not without consequences. We are using docket image google/cloud-sdk from docket hub. I am renaming the entry in the /etc/apt/sources.list.d/google-cloud-sdk.list file entries cloud-sdk-bookworm to cloud-sdk-bullseye as follows:
This issue was known previously and was supposed to be fixed. It seems the problem has resurfaced, potentially due to the new 467.0.0 update, although I have yet to confirm this with the engineering team.
Just checked with 468.0.0 and the apt-get update no longer fails so it seems the issue has been fixed. However, the labels in this file packages.cloud.google.com/apt/dists/cloud-sdk-bookworm/Release still look wrong. That's a really minor thing though so probably not worth fixing.
This actually is still an issue for anyone using unattended-upgrades to update from google-cloud-sdk. I have had to go and manually edit the 50unattended-upgrades file on several Debian 12 systems and replace "origin=cloud-sdk,codename=cloud-sdk,label=cloud-sdk"; with "origin=cloud-sdk-bullseye,codename=cloud-sdk-bookworm,label=cloud-sdk-bullseye";. Undoubtedly, I will forget to check this when it is fixed and will start wondering why my automatic updates are broken. Please can we have the page that dkanov referenced above fixed?
This actually is an issue for anyone using unattended-upgrades to update from google-cloud-sdk. I have had to go and manually edit the 50unattended-upgrades file on several Debian 12 systems and replace "origin=cloud-sdk,codename=cloud-sdk,label=cloud-sdk"; with "origin=cloud-sdk-bullseye,codename=cloud-sdk-bookworm,label=cloud-sdk-bullseye";. Undoubtedly, I will forget to check this when it is fixed and will start wondering why my automatic updates are broken. Please can we have the page that dkanov referenced above fixed?
Still I think the same. Debian 12 will have a long way to go before it is stable. If the manufacturer of hardware , in this case Intel force you to use the newest OS to be able to use their products, I would not buy it. Very many will use Debian 11 for long time yet, before they shift. But that is a choice Intel has made. Thats one reason I dont use Intel. But that is my opinion.
So I did a dry run fresh install on an RPi4 that I had done a Bullseye RPi4 Fresh install on, then done a dist-upgrade through APT to Bookworm. I installed the deps for a supervised install, and then installed the supervised deb package available with the following command: sudo BYPASS_OS_CHECK=true apt install ./homeassistant-supervised.deb - this bypasses the Debian 11 system check and compels the install. The supervised install works although runs into issues configuring NetworkManager unless it is previously configured and external control of your networking will be unavailable. Since systemd-resolved is not the default manager in Debian 12, and requires manual reinstallation, I anticipate there will be hiccoughs here for the average user. I have not tried on an install where NetworkManager is previously configured prior to a dist upgrade. Aside from this issue, supervised will whinge about not being on a supported OS (although this can be suppressed via CLI) but has run without issue for 24h now.
While browsing the HA github pages, I came across this: Bug Report: Debian 12 not listed as supported OS Issue #296 home-assistant/supervised-installer GitHub . Seems like the support for Bookworm is coming in the next release (without any confirmation when).
The homeassistant-supervised.deb package does not expect Debian 12. You could install Debian 11, it is easy to upgrade to Debian 12 after you get HA running. I suspect that is what everyone currently using Debian 11 will be doing over the next few months.
i installed debian 12 supervised today the only thing i needed to do before installing disable modemmanager install systemd-resolved i always when installing HA copy past commands from here so it also installs jq wget curl udisks2 libglib2.0-bin network-manager dbus systemd-journal-remote Installing Home Assistant Supervised on Debian 11 - Community Guides - Home Assistant Community (home-assistant.io) all works fine auto discovery and addons no issues for now yes unsupported OS so unsupported system but i install things outside HA anyway so my setup always shows unsupported but as long as it shows healthy im ok with that. i thought i test 12 im going to move my 5/6 year old debian install to new machine with proxmox and debian in VM but im still bit scared it all works so well i used clonezilla to copy the phisical drive to VM drive but its going to be a mess because it uses nvidia GPU for plex jellyfin ffmpeg compreface frigate etc and the new one has only Iris Xe igpu but all for less power usage its a old dell server the new one gen12 i7 1270p. but to use the iris xe as vgpu in debian i at least need kernel version 6.1 so debian 12 would be perfect because it comes with 6.1.
Personally, I'm really looking forward to these updates, and hope they will save me from numerous bugs
For example the bug with square corners on round themes in KDE 5.20.5
Or the dreaded Gnome Software 3.38.1 which takes a long time to load, and does not always install flatpak applications correctly, and then they do not start
In addition, there are now many small cosmetic bugs. And the endless attempts to make the plymouth theme work on an encrypted system
The system startup itself is visually awful, such as artifacts on the dark screen before the dock appears.
Of course, it's also possible there's extra complexity that pushes things back further - I would assume the splitting of non-free and non-free-firmware, or the usr-merge stuff, both have potential to create extra work for the Devuan team which may mean things end up taking longer.
It's just awful if that's the case. It makes me think about changing the main OS to Debian after that. So everyone who uses Devuan gets new updates at least two months later than the "slowest" distribution.
No, that's not the case at all. Devuan users have to wait a few hours after debian posts updates. The actual time it takes for the mirrors to update varies, but I think the longest is four hours. 152ee80cbc