191–200 of 303 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nice. There were a couple of things that were 'apt-cache', I could never remember which, I gather 'apt' does those too?
It does 'seach' and 'show' from apt-cache at least, not sure about any others.
PSA: If you're running a HTTP/2 server like NGINX on the 14.04 LTS you'll want to upgrade to this release. Google Chrome will no longer support HTTP/2 on vanilla 14.04 after May 15th [0], even if you're using the latest official upstream NGINX packages. This is because 14.04 ships with a version of OpenSSL that does not support the ALPN extension (prior to OpenSSL 1.0.2 you're limited to NPN, now deprecated). There w…
For some softwares like Nginx you should use official repo from the Nginx team and not rely on your distro repos. http://nginx.org/en/linux_packages.html
Is there any way I can download Ubuntu securely? They don't seem to have an HTTPS link to the .iso file
Mozilla will release Firefox directly via snaps https://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2016/04/21/firefox-d...
PSA: If you're running a HTTP/2 server like NGINX on the 14.04 LTS you'll want to upgrade to this release. Google Chrome will no longer support HTTP/2 on vanilla 14.04 after May 15th [0], even if you're using the latest official upstream NGINX packages. This is because 14.04 ships with a version of OpenSSL that does not support the ALPN extension (prior to OpenSSL 1.0.2 you're limited to NPN, now deprecated). There w…
> Google Chrome will no longer support HTTP/2 on vanilla 14.04 after May 15th Doe this mean 14.04 with Apache 2.2 is affected? Their blog doesnt explain and leave plenty of people confused...
PSA: If you're running a HTTP/2 server like NGINX on the 14.04 LTS you'll want to upgrade to this release. Google Chrome will no longer support HTTP/2 on vanilla 14.04 after May 15th [0], even if you're using the latest official upstream NGINX packages. This is because 14.04 ships with a version of OpenSSL that does not support the ALPN extension (prior to OpenSSL 1.0.2 you're limited to NPN, now deprecated). There w…
If you use 14.04, you usually upgrade at the first point release to 16.04.01, not now at 16.04.00. Only 15.10 will immediately suggest an update. Is this outdated or not applicable to servers?
However, you can also "upgrade" your stack by building a new image using 16.04 from scratch, and that doesn't need to wait until 16.04.1.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I love the part about simplifying packaging via 'snap'. Bleargh. More container bullshit, now with even less control over it by end users. Now each tiny library update (think OpenSSL security fixes) will pull hundreds of "snaps" instead of a single package… assuming the developers even realize they have to rebuild their snaps.
While I see your point, the idea that I as an end user have any real control now is absurd. All I can do is hope the people who package stuff for their distribution know what they are doing. If I want to install software that's outside the stuff that the packagers have prepared, like Firefox with correct KDE integration on Kubuntu, I am relying on a number of hard to track things working correctly together. Which teh…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're conflating collision attacks like the Flame malware with a preimage attack that would be necessary to produce a malicious Ubuntu release with the same MD5SUM. I.e. what's "broken" about MD5 is if you have a lot of CPU time and I allow you to give me two unrelated blobs, you can craft those blobs to have the same MD5 sum. What's not "broken" (beyond a theoretical 2^123.4 attack) with MD5 and not broken at all f…
You should think about this in terms of collision resistance. Canonical doesn't write most of the packages that go into a release.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Upstart provided comparable service for years. There was no reason to use bash scripts and watchdogs / restarters before.
Yes, there was a reason: Having to support other distros. The big deal now is that all the major distributions support the same mechanism.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Google Chrome will no longer support HTTP/2 on vanilla 14.04 after May 15th Doe this mean 14.04 with Apache 2.2 is affected? Their blog doesnt explain and leave plenty of people confused...
I don't think so. If it was, half the internet would go down for Chrome users.
Even in cases where a HTTP/2 or SPDY connection will no longer be established for Chrome users, the browser will fall back to HTTP 1.1. Unless you're using specific HTTP/2 features, the main impact will be decreased performance.