Forum: >>> Magnum BBS <<<

Kernel not upgrading in all systems

From Gary Dale@21:1/5 to All on Sat Feb 8 18:10:01 2025

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
I have a few systems running Debian/Stable (Bookworm). However the
kernel version isn't always the same for some reason. After this
morning's update, I noticed that 2 of the 3 systems upgraded the kernel
but to different versions. This is shown by running uname -a.

The first is a VM. It has been using this kernel for a while now, as it
hasn't updated any packages recently. It is updated from the Debian U.S. repositories.

/ Linux VM1 6.1.0-21-amd64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.1.90-1 (2024-05-03) x86_64 GNU/Linux/

The second is a real machine. The kernel updated this morning. It is
updated from the Canadian mirrors.

/ Linux RM1 6.1.0-21-amd64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.1.90-1 (2024-05-03) x86_64 GNU/Linux/

The third is also a real machine. It hosts the VM (among others). It
also updated the kernel today.It is also updated from the Canadian mirrors.

/ Linux RM2 6.1.0-31-amd64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.1.128-1 (2025-02-07) x86_64 GNU/Linux
/

Running |/dpkg -l | grep "^hi" / and confirming with ||/dpkg
--get-selections | grep "\<hold$"/ shows that I have no held packages.|

|The hardware (real and virtual) is similar in that they are all running
AMD CPUs (Ryzen).|

|I run the updates on all 3 machines at least weekly, so I'm wondering
why they aren't all getting the same kernel upgrades. Why did RM1 only
get a 9 month old update today while RM2 got an update from yesterday
already?
|

|VM1: /etc/apt/sources.list|

|deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ stable main non-free-firmware
deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian/ stable main non-free-firmware

deb http://security.debian.org/debian-security stable-security main non-free-firmware
deb-src http://security.debian.org/debian-security stable-security main non-free-firmware

deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ stable-updates main non-free-firmware
deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian/ stable-updates main non-free-firmware

|

|RM1: /etc/apt/sources.list|

deb http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/ stable main non-free-firmware
deb-src http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/ stable main non-free-firmware

deb http://security.debian.org/debian-security bookworm-security main non-free-firmware
deb-src http://security.debian.org/debian-security bookworm-security
main non-free-firmware

deb http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/ stable-updates main
deb-src http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/ stable-updates main

|RM2: /etc/apt/sources.list
|

deb http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/ stable main non-free-firmware
deb-src http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/ stable main non-free-firmware

deb http://security.debian.org/ stable-security main
deb-src http://security.debian.org/ stable-security main

deb http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/ stable-updates main
deb-src http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/ stable-updates main

RM2 also has this in sources.list.d

-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 89 Dec 10 2023 jitsi-stable.list
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 49 Jul 14 2022 sury-php.list

Can anyone help me understand this behaviour?

Thanks.

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>

<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
I have a few
systems running Debian/Stable (Bookworm). However the kernel
version isn't always the same for some reason. After this
morning's update, I noticed that 2 of the 3 systems upgraded
the kernel but to different versions. This is shown by running
uname -a. 

The first is a
VM. It has been using this kernel for a while now, as it
hasn't updated any packages recently. It is updated from the
Debian U.S. repositories. 

 Linux VM1
6.1.0-21-amd64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.1.90-1
(2024-05-03) x86_64 GNU/Linux
The second is a real machine.
The kernel updated this morning. It is updated from the Canadian
mirrors. 

 Linux RM1
6.1.0-21-amd64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.1.90-1
(2024-05-03) x86_64 GNU/Linux
The third is also a real
machine. It hosts the VM (among others). It also updated the
kernel today. It is
also updated from the Canadian mirrors. 

 
 Linux
RM2 6.1.0-31-amd64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.1.128-1
(2025-02-07) x86_64 GNU/Linux 


Running <code>dpkg
-l | grep "^hi" and confirming with </code><code>dpkg
--get-selections | grep "\<hold$" shows that I have no
held packages.</code>
<code>The hardware (real and virtual) is similar in that they are
all running AMD CPUs (Ryzen).</code>
<code>I run the updates on all 3 machines at least weekly, so I'm
wondering why they aren't all getting the same kernel upgrades.
Why did RM1 only get a 9 month old update today while RM2 got an
update from yesterday already? 
</code>
<code>VM1: /etc/apt/sources.list</code>
<code>deb <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://deb.debian.org/debian/">http://deb.debian.org/debian/</a> stable main
non-free-firmware 
deb-src <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://deb.debian.org/debian/">http://deb.debian.org/debian/</a> stable main
non-free-firmware 
 
deb <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://security.debian.org/debian-security">http://security.debian.org/debian-security</a> stable-security
main non-free-firmware 
deb-src <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://security.debian.org/debian-security">http://security.debian.org/debian-security</a>
stable-security main non-free-firmware 
 
deb <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://deb.debian.org/debian/">http://deb.debian.org/debian/</a> stable-updates main
non-free-firmware 
deb-src <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://deb.debian.org/debian/">http://deb.debian.org/debian/</a> stable-updates main
non-free-firmware 
 
</code>
<code>RM1: /etc/apt/sources.list</code>
deb
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/">http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/</a> stable main non-free-firmware
 
deb-src
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/">http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/</a> stable main non-free-firmware
 
 
deb
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://security.debian.org/debian-security">http://security.debian.org/debian-security</a> bookworm-security
main non-free-firmware
 
deb-src
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://security.debian.org/debian-security">http://security.debian.org/debian-security</a> bookworm-security
main non-free-firmware
 
 
deb
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/">http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/</a> stable-updates main
 
deb-src
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/">http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/</a> stable-updates main 

 

<code>RM2: /etc/apt/sources.list 
</code>
deb
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/">http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/</a> stable main non-free-firmware
 
deb-src
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/">http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/</a> stable main non-free-firmware
 
 
deb
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://security.debian.org/">http://security.debian.org/</a> stable-security main
 
deb-src
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://security.debian.org/">http://security.debian.org/</a> stable-security main
 
 
deb
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/">http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/</a> stable-updates main
 
deb-src
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/">http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/</a> stable-updates main 

 
RM2 also has this in sources.list.d
-rw-r--r-- 1
root root 89 Dec 10 2023 jitsi-stable.list
 
-rw-r--r--
1 root root 49 Jul 14 2022 sury-php.list 


 

Can anyone help me understand
this behaviour?
Thanks. 

</body>
</html>

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

From Henrik Ahlgren@21:1/5 to Gary Dale on Sun Feb 9 12:30:01 2025

On Sat, 2025-02-08 at 12:05 -0500, Gary Dale wrote:

I have a few systems running Debian/Stable (Bookworm). However the kernel version isn't always the same for some reason. After this morning's update, I noticed that 2 of the 3 systems upgraded the kernel but to different versions. This is shown by

running uname -a.
...

Can anyone help me understand this behaviour?

How did you attempt the actual uprade? Note that "apt upgrade" is not
enough, you need to do "apt full-upgrade" when the kernel ABI has been increased (NN+ in linux-image-6.1.0-NN-amd64).

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

From Greg Wooledge@21:1/5 to Henrik Ahlgren on Sun Feb 9 15:10:01 2025

On Sun, Feb 09, 2025 at 13:22:50 +0200, Henrik Ahlgren wrote:

On Sat, 2025-02-08 at 12:05 -0500, Gary Dale wrote:

I have a few systems running Debian/Stable (Bookworm). However the kernel version isn't always the same for some reason. After this morning's update, I noticed that 2 of the 3 systems upgraded the kernel but to different versions. This is shown by

running uname -a.

...

Can anyone help me understand this behaviour?

Did you reboot? "uname -a" shows the running kernel, which is not
necessarily the newest installed kernel.

What you really want to do is compare the output of "uname -a" (which
shows the running kernel) with the output of "ls /boot/vmlinuz-*"
(which shows the installed kernel images). That'll tell you whether
a reboot is needed, at least in most cases.[1]

How did you attempt the actual uprade? Note that "apt upgrade" is not
enough, you need to do "apt full-upgrade" when the kernel ABI has been increased (NN+ in linux-image-6.1.0-NN-amd64).

You're thinking of apt-get upgrade. What you said is correct concerning apt-get, but apt upgrade *will* bring in new kernel packages by default,
so long as the metapackage is installed.

The metapackage in question is the one without an ABI version number
in it, but with the architecture in it. For me, it is named
linux-image-amd64. On other architectures, it would be linux-image-ARCH.

I would recommend that Gary check whether this is installed on the one
system that appears not to have upgraded the kernel.

[1] Sometimes, *very* rarely, a kernel security patch may be released
that doesn't change the ABI version number. In this case, ls wouldn't
show you that there's a newer kernel installed but not yet running.
You'd have to use something like "dpkg -l linux-image\* | grep ^.i"
to see the actual package version numbers, and compare that against
the *second* version number in the output of "uname -a".

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

From Hans@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 9 16:30:01 2025

Dis you install the package "linux-image-amd64" ? If yes, the it should always update to the newest kernel.

(Same for package "linux-headers-amd64")

Hans

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

From Gary Dale@21:1/5 to Greg Wooledge on Fri Feb 14 15:50:02 2025

On 2025-02-09 09:01, Greg Wooledge wrote:

On Sun, Feb 09, 2025 at 13:22:50 +0200, Henrik Ahlgren wrote:

On Sat, 2025-02-08 at 12:05 -0500, Gary Dale wrote:

I have a few systems running Debian/Stable (Bookworm). However the kernel version isn't always the same for some reason. After this morning's update, I noticed that 2 of the 3 systems upgraded the kernel but to different versions. This is shown by

running uname -a.

...

Can anyone help me understand this behaviour?

Did you reboot? "uname -a" shows the running kernel, which is not necessarily the newest installed kernel.

What you really want to do is compare the output of "uname -a" (which
shows the running kernel) with the output of "ls /boot/vmlinuz-*"
(which shows the installed kernel images). That'll tell you whether
a reboot is needed, at least in most cases.[1]

I always reboot after a kernel upgrade so uname -a should always return
the current installed kernel.

How did you attempt the actual uprade? Note that "apt upgrade" is not
enough, you need to do "apt full-upgrade" when the kernel ABI has been
increased (NN+ in linux-image-6.1.0-NN-amd64).

You're thinking of apt-get upgrade. What you said is correct concerning apt-get, but apt upgrade *will* bring in new kernel packages by default,
so long as the metapackage is installed.

The metapackage in question is the one without an ABI version number
in it, but with the architecture in it. For me, it is named linux-image-amd64. On other architectures, it would be linux-image-ARCH.

I would recommend that Gary check whether this is installed on the one
system that appears not to have upgraded the kernel.

[1] Sometimes, *very* rarely, a kernel security patch may be released
that doesn't change the ABI version number. In this case, ls wouldn't
show you that there's a newer kernel installed but not yet running.
You'd have to use something like "dpkg -l linux-image\* | grep ^.i"
to see the actual package version numbers, and compare that against
the *second* version number in the output of "uname -a".

All 3 systems have the linux-image-amd64 metapackage installed.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

From Gary Dale@21:1/5 to Henrik Ahlgren on Fri Feb 14 15:30:02 2025

On 2025-02-09 06:22, Henrik Ahlgren wrote:

On Sat, 2025-02-08 at 12:05 -0500, Gary Dale wrote:

I have a few systems running Debian/Stable (Bookworm). However the kernel version isn't always the same for some reason. After this morning's update, I noticed that 2 of the 3 systems upgraded the kernel but to different versions. This is shown by

running uname -a.

...

Can anyone help me understand this behaviour?

How did you attempt the actual uprade? Note that "apt upgrade" is not
enough, you need to do "apt full-upgrade" when the kernel ABI has been increased (NN+ in linux-image-6.1.0-NN-amd64).

I always do "full-upgrade"

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

From Gary Dale@21:1/5 to Max Nikulin on Fri Feb 14 16:00:01 2025

On 2025-02-09 11:46, Max Nikulin wrote:

On 09/02/2025 00:05, Gary Dale wrote:

VM1: /etc/apt/sources.list

I recommend to compare

apt policy linux-image-amd64

and

apt policy

I can't see any differences between them on the various systems.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

From Michael Stone@21:1/5 to Gary Dale on Sat Feb 15 04:10:01 2025

On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 09:42:10AM -0500, Gary Dale wrote:

All 3 systems have the linux-image-amd64 metapackage installed.

What does
apt show -a linux-image-amd64 | grep -e Version -e Sources -e Depends
return on each system?

If you
apt update
on each system, are there any error messages?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

From Gary Dale@21:1/5 to Michael Stone on Thu Feb 27 22:00:02 2025

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
On 2025-02-14 22:00, Michael Stone wrote:

On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 09:42:10AM -0500, Gary Dale wrote:

All 3 systems have the linux-image-amd64 metapackage installed.

What does apt show -a linux-image-amd64 | grep -e Version -e Sources
-e Depends
return on each system?

If you
apt update
on each system, are there any error messages?

On RM1

# apt show -a linux-image-amd64 | grep -e Version -e Sources -e Depends

WARNING: apt does not have a stable CLI interface. Use with caution in
scripts.

Version: 6.1.128-1
Depends: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64 (= 6.1.128-1)
APT-Sources: http://security.debian.org stable-security/main amd64 Packages Version: 6.1.124-1
Depends: linux-image-6.1.0-30-amd64 (= 6.1.124-1)
APT-Sources: http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian stable-updates/main amd64
Packages
Version: 6.1.123-1
Depends: linux-image-6.1.0-29-amd64 (= 6.1.123-1)
APT-Sources: http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian stable/main amd64 Packages
# uname -a
#1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.1.128-1 (2025-02-07) x86_64 GNU/Linux

ON RM2

# apt show -a linux-image-amd64 | grep -e Version -e Sources -e Depends

WARNING: apt does not have a stable CLI interface. Use with caution in
scripts.

Version: 6.1.128-1
Depends: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64 (= 6.1.128-1)
APT-Sources: http://security.debian.org/debian-security
stable-security/main amd64 Packages
Version: 6.1.124-1
Depends: linux-image-6.1.0-30-amd64 (= 6.1.124-1)
APT-Sources: http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian stable-updates/main amd64
Packages
Version: 6.1.123-1
Depends: linux-image-6.1.0-29-amd64 (= 6.1.123-1)
APT-Sources: http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian stable/main amd64 Packages Version: 6.1.64-1
Config-Version: 6.1.64-1
Depends: linux-image-6.1.0-14-amd64 (= 6.1.64-1)
APT-Sources: /var/lib/dpkg/status
# uname -a
#1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.1.90-1 (2024-05-03) x86_64 GNU/Linux

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2025-02-14 22:00, Michael Stone
wrote: 
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:[email protected]">On
Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 09:42:10AM -0500, Gary Dale wrote:
 
<blockquote type="cite">All 3 systems have the linux-image-amd64
metapackage installed.
 
</blockquote>
 
What does apt show -a linux-image-amd64 | grep -e Version -e
Sources -e Depends
 
return on each system?
 
 
If you
 
apt update
 
on each system, are there any error messages?
 
</blockquote>
 

On RM1 

# apt show
-a linux-image-amd64 | grep -e Version -e Sources -e Depends 
 
WARNING: apt
does not have a stable CLI interface. Use with caution in
scripts.
 
 
Version:
6.1.128-1
 
Depends:
linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64 (= 6.1.128-1)
 
APT-Sources:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://security.debian.org">http://security.debian.org</a> stable-security/main amd64 Packages
 
Version:
6.1.124-1
 
Depends:
linux-image-6.1.0-30-amd64 (= 6.1.124-1)
 
APT-Sources:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian">http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian</a> stable-updates/main amd64
Packages
 
Version:
6.1.123-1
 
Depends:
linux-image-6.1.0-29-amd64 (= 6.1.123-1)
 
APT-Sources:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian">http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian</a> stable/main amd64 Packages 

#
uname -a
 
#1 SMP
PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.1.128-1 (2025-02-07) x86_64 GNU/Linux 

 
 

ON RM2 

# apt show -a linux-image-amd64 | grep -e Version -e Sources -e
Depends 
 
WARNING: apt does not have a stable CLI interface. Use with
caution in scripts. 
 
Version: 6.1.128-1 
Depends: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64 (= 6.1.128-1) 
APT-Sources: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://security.debian.org/debian-security">http://security.debian.org/debian-security</a>
stable-security/main amd64 Packages 
Version: 6.1.124-1 
Depends: linux-image-6.1.0-30-amd64 (= 6.1.124-1) 
APT-Sources: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian">http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian</a> stable-updates/main
amd64 Packages 
Version: 6.1.123-1 
Depends: linux-image-6.1.0-29-amd64 (= 6.1.123-1) 
APT-Sources: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian">http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian</a> stable/main amd64
Packages 
Version: 6.1.64-1 
Config-Version: 6.1.64-1 
Depends: linux-image-6.1.0-14-amd64 (= 6.1.64-1) 
APT-Sources: /var/lib/dpkg/status 
# uname -a 
#1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.1.90-1 (2024-05-03) x86_64
GNU/Linux 
 

</body>
</html>

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

From Gary Dale@21:1/5 to Gary Dale on Sat Mar 15 15:50:02 2025

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
On 2025-02-27 15:59, Gary Dale wrote:

On 2025-02-14 22:00, Michael Stone wrote:

On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 09:42:10AM -0500, Gary Dale wrote:

All 3 systems have the linux-image-amd64 metapackage installed.

What does apt show -a linux-image-amd64 | grep -e Version -e Sources
-e Depends
return on each system?

If you
apt update
on each system, are there any error messages?

On RM1

# apt show -a linux-image-amd64 | grep -e Version -e Sources -e Depends

WARNING: apt does not have a stable CLI interface. Use with caution in scripts.

Version: 6.1.128-1
Depends: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64 (= 6.1.128-1)
APT-Sources: http://security.debian.org stable-security/main amd64
Packages
Version: 6.1.124-1
Depends: linux-image-6.1.0-30-amd64 (= 6.1.124-1)
APT-Sources: http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian stable-updates/main amd64 Packages
Version: 6.1.123-1
Depends: linux-image-6.1.0-29-amd64 (= 6.1.123-1)
APT-Sources: http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian stable/main amd64 Packages
# uname -a
#1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.1.128-1 (2025-02-07) x86_64 GNU/Linux

ON RM2

# apt show -a linux-image-amd64 | grep -e Version -e Sources -e Depends

WARNING: apt does not have a stable CLI interface. Use with caution in scripts.

Version: 6.1.128-1
Depends: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64 (= 6.1.128-1)
APT-Sources: http://security.debian.org/debian-security
stable-security/main amd64 Packages
Version: 6.1.124-1
Depends: linux-image-6.1.0-30-amd64 (= 6.1.124-1)
APT-Sources: http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian stable-updates/main amd64 Packages
Version: 6.1.123-1
Depends: linux-image-6.1.0-29-amd64 (= 6.1.123-1)
APT-Sources: http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian stable/main amd64 Packages Version: 6.1.64-1
Config-Version: 6.1.64-1
Depends: linux-image-6.1.0-14-amd64 (= 6.1.64-1)
APT-Sources: /var/lib/dpkg/status
# uname -a
#1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.1.90-1 (2024-05-03) x86_64 GNU/Linux

After today's upgrades, I note that RM1 showed these autoremove messages "Removing linux-headers-6.1.0-30-amd64 (6.1.124-1) ..." and "Removing linux-image-6.1.0-30-amd64 (6.1.124-1) ..." while RM2 showed "Removing linux-headers-6.1.0-31-amd64 (6.1.128-1) ...". RM1 but no mention of linux-image.
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2025-02-27 15:59, Gary Dale wrote: 
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:[email protected]">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2025-02-14 22:00, Michael Stone
wrote: 
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:[email protected]">On
Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 09:42:10AM -0500, Gary Dale wrote: 
<blockquote type="cite">All 3 systems have the linux-image-amd64
metapackage installed. 
</blockquote>
 
What does apt show -a linux-image-amd64 | grep -e Version -e
Sources -e Depends 
return on each system? 
 
If you 
apt update 
on each system, are there any error messages? 
</blockquote>
 

On RM1 

# apt
show -a linux-image-amd64 | grep -e Version -e Sources -e
Depends 
 
WARNING:
apt does not have a stable CLI interface. Use with caution in
scripts. 
 
Version:
6.1.128-1 
Depends:
linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64 (= 6.1.128-1) 
APT-Sources:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://security.debian.org" moz-do-not-send="true">http://security.debian.org</a>
stable-security/main amd64 Packages 
Version:
6.1.124-1 
Depends:
linux-image-6.1.0-30-amd64 (= 6.1.124-1) 
APT-Sources:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian</a>
stable-updates/main amd64 Packages 
Version:
6.1.123-1 
Depends:
linux-image-6.1.0-29-amd64 (= 6.1.123-1) 
APT-Sources:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian</a>
stable/main amd64 Packages 
 # uname -a 
#1 SMP
PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.1.128-1 (2025-02-07) x86_64 GNU/Linux 
 
 

ON RM2 

# apt show -a linux-image-amd64 | grep -e Version -e Sources -e
Depends 
 
WARNING: apt does not have a stable CLI interface. Use with
caution in scripts. 
 
Version: 6.1.128-1 
Depends: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64 (= 6.1.128-1) 
APT-Sources: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://security.debian.org/debian-security"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://security.debian.org/debian-security</a>
stable-security/main amd64 Packages 
Version: 6.1.124-1 
Depends: linux-image-6.1.0-30-amd64 (= 6.1.124-1) 
APT-Sources: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian" moz-do-not-send="true">http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian</a>
stable-updates/main amd64 Packages 
Version: 6.1.123-1 
Depends: linux-image-6.1.0-29-amd64 (= 6.1.123-1) 
APT-Sources: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian" moz-do-not-send="true">http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian</a>
stable/main amd64 Packages 
Version: 6.1.64-1 
Config-Version: 6.1.64-1 
Depends: linux-image-6.1.0-14-amd64 (= 6.1.64-1) 
APT-Sources: /var/lib/dpkg/status 
# uname -a 
#1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.1.90-1 (2024-05-03) x86_64
GNU/Linux 

</blockquote>
After today's upgrades, I note that RM1
showed these autoremove messages "Removing
linux-headers-6.1.0-30-amd64 (6.1.124-1) ..." and "Removing
linux-image-6.1.0-30-amd64 (6.1.124-1) ..." while RM2 showed
"Removing linux-headers-6.1.0-31-amd64 (6.1.128-1) ...". RM1 but
no mention of linux-image.
</body>
</html>

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Who's Online
Recent Visitors
- Krenn
  Sat Jun 6 11:38:56 2026
  from Sydney, Nsw via Telnet
- Furryboy
  Sat Jun 6 10:56:29 2026
  from Romania, Galati via SSH
- Centurion
  Fri Jun 5 22:28:01 2026
  from Berea, Ohio via Telnet
- Ab Cadd
  Fri Jun 5 17:52:51 2026
  from Sheboygan, Wi via Telnet
- Gwylbert
  Fri Jun 5 06:28:52 2026
  from Sydney, Nsw via Telnet
- Centurion
  Thu Jun 4 23:42:23 2026
  from Berea, Ohio via Telnet
- Michal Wronka
  Thu Jun 4 23:19:58 2026
  from Wroclaw, Poland via Telnet
- Michal Wronka
  Thu Jun 4 23:17:20 2026
  from Wroclaw, Poland via SSH

System Info

Sysop:	Keyop
Location:	Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK
Users:	715
Nodes:	16 (2 / 14)
Uptime:	146:11:25
Calls:	12,089
Calls today:	2
Files:	15,000
Messages:	6,517,501

Kernel not upgrading in all systems

Who's Online

Recent Visitors

System Info