When I tried to upgrade from Ubuntu 18.04 to Ubuntu 20.04 I I got stuck. While upgrading, it shows: 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1 not upgraded.

W: Skipping acquire of configured file 'multiverse/binary-amd64/Packages' as repository 'http://archive.canonical.com/ubuntu  bionic InRelease' doesn't have the component 'multiverse' (component misspelt in sources.list?)
W: Skipping acquire of configured file 'multiverse/i18n/Translation-en_IN' as repository 'http://archive.canonical.com/ubuntu  bionic InRelease' doesn't have the component 'multiverse' (component misspelt in sources.list?)
W: Skipping acquire of configured file 'multiverse/i18n/Translation-en_GB' as repository 'http://archive.canonical.com/ubuntu  bionic InRelease' doesn't have the component 'multiverse' (component misspelt in sources.list?)
W: Skipping acquire of configured file 'multiverse/i18n/Translation-en' as repository 'http://archive.canonical.com/ubuntu  bionic InRelease' doesn't have the component 'multiverse' (component misspelt in sources.list?)
W: Skipping acquire of configured file 'multiverse/dep11/Components-amd64.yml' as repository 'http://archive.canonical.com/ubuntu  bionic InRelease' doesn't have the component 'multiverse' (component misspelt in sources.list?)
W: Skipping acquire of configured file 'multiverse/dep11/icons-48x48.tar' as repository 'http://archive.canonical.com/ubuntu  bionic InRelease' doesn't have the component 'multiverse' (component misspelt in sources.list?)
W: Skipping acquire of configured file 'multiverse/dep11/icons-64x64.tar' as repository 'http://archive.canonical.com/ubuntu  bionic InRelease' doesn't have the component 'multiverse' (component misspelt in sources.list?)
W: Skipping acquire of configured file 'multiverse/cnf/Commands-amd64' as repository 'http://archive.canonical.com/ubuntu  bionic InRelease' doesn't have the component 'multiverse' (component misspelt in sources.list?)

I tried sudo nano /etc/apt/sources.list, and it says the same line already exists in sources.list.

deb http://archive.canonical.com/ubuntu  bionic partner

I found a solution on the internet. Replace this line: deb http://archive.canonical.com/ubuntu bionic multiverse partner with this line: deb http://archive.canonical.com/ubuntu bionic partner. But the same line was already present in my sources.list. Now I'm unable to upgrade from Ubuntu 18.04 to Ubuntu 20.04.

I am new on Linux ecosystem and have some confusions regarding the terminology that are being used. With that being said, my reason to switch to a Linux Distro from Windows because it provides a unified package manager from where I can download and install software, without needing to go on the web and find necessary ones. The distro I am currently using is Ubuntu 20.04.2.0, which is good, but the packages they provide are kind of old and I would not be complaining if they had at least provided the LTS version of the software. So, I recently came across Arch and Manjaro which are rolling release distros, but I am interested as it provides both the latest versions and LTS versions of the softwares. That is great. But, I am little worried because most of the software I use are in the Community Repo (Node JS, Dotnet Core and gh). And, here is quote from Arch documentation: > community contains packages that have been adopted by Trusted Users from the Arch User Repository. Some of these packages may eventually make the transition to the core or extra repositories as the developers consider them crucial to the distribution. It says "Trusted Users" (respect for them) pick the packages from the AUR to "Community Repo". From some online forums and articles, I learnt that it a good practice to avoid using AUR as it may cause unwanted things or even infect ones PC with viruses and malwares. Once again, I am a noob in Linux world and have absolutely no idea about Arch Linux and its derivatives. So, I wanted to know, is it safe to use packages from the Community Repo. Does the "Trusted Users" (maintainers of Community Repo) check for validity and security of the AURs that transition to the Community Repo?

i want to install mssql-server in the centos 7 server ... i did the procedure before on other server before how ever for this one i could not able to install mssql-tools .. the mssql server is installed and works fine. what i am doing is i config the repo sudo curl -o /etc/yum.repos.d/msprod.repo https://packages.microsoft.com/config/rhel/7/prod.repo and then install sudo yum install -y mssql-tools unixODBC-devel the unixODBC-devel is fine. how ever i get this output Loaded plugins: fastestmirror Repository packages-microsoft-com-prod is listed more than once in the configuration Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile * base: mirror.docker.ru * epel: mirror.telepoint.bg * extras: mirror.docker.ru * updates: mirror.corbina.net No package mssql-tools available. Error: Nothing to do i searched on the part of message that says > Repository packages-microsoft-com-prod is listed more than once in the > configuration however i am not sure but i think i got the same in previous server and every thing installed fine. any way i did some procedure suggested for that and still i get the same message. this is my yum.repos.d directory CentOS-Base.repo CentOS-Media.repo epel.repo mssql-server.repo CentOS-CR.repo CentOS-Sources.repo epel-testing.repo CentOS-Debuginfo.repo CentOS-Vault.repo microsoft-prod.repo CentOS-fasttrack.repo CentOS-x86_64-kernel.repo msprod.repo msprod.repo is the one.

After my question about a complete list for the Debian 12 sources.list, I was referred from @Stephen Kitt from the old format to the new format DEB822-STYLE FORMAT : >It’s best to use a “DEB822” format file (with a .sources extension rather than .list); for Debian 12, this means /etc/apt/sources.list.d/debian.sources. - All available Debian 12 repository entries for /etc/apt/sources.list from official Debian servers I also found the following: ***Translated from German*** >Defining the same repository in both formats is currently not allowed, unless one of the entries is commented out with #. > It is still unclear whether deb822 will become mandatory as early as summer with Debian 13 "Trixie". For that, APT 3.0 would first need to be released as a stable version. - Debian is implementing deb822 for the sources list. >Tools like apt-add-repository, apt-source, and software-properties-gtk are designed to work with .sources files (Deb822 format) for specifying APT repository information. While it's true that older releases of Ubuntu and Debian primarily used .list files, the Deb822 format is the standard in newer versions, including Ubuntu 24.04 and later. - APT deb822 sources by default - Ubuntu 24.04 APT - Specify Architecture Using .sources Files - curtin 23.1.1 documentation » APT Source - Using gpg Instead of apt-key and add-apt-repository - Software Sources is not compatible with deb822 - Support DEB822 format for source lists **Additionally:** - I can store everything in a single file - The format is deb822 (file extension .sources) - Multiple entries (stanzas) are allowed in one file - Each entry starts with a new Types: line However, I can also save the repository categories (as I had them in the classic sources.list ) as separate files like main.sources or non-free.sources, and either comment them out or deactivate them by renaming the file extension, since APT will ignore files that do not end in .sources. - How to use multiple options in apt sources.list? - Explanation of the DEB822 Source Format - deb822(5) - Linux manual page - DEB822 style /etc/apt/sources.list? - RFC822-style sources.list yields "E: Type 'Types:' is not known" > Since apt version 2.9.26, you can run apt modernize-sources as root to automatically rewrite the .list files and converting them to .source files, as long as they are valid already. Otherwise versions 2.3.10 or later supports the new format and can be manually modified. - Migrating all my third party repositories sources.list to deb822-style Is all of that correct so far, and does it actually make sense to split everything like that or is it unnecessary? Is there anything else important to consider in advance if you switch everything over now?

I set up a local APT repository, which is working fine, except that apt update doesn't fetch Contents-amd64.gz files, like it does from an official online Debian repo. [Note : apt-file is installed, and apt update from an online Debian repo does indeed fetch Contents-* files. So there *must* be a problem with my local repo.] For the purpose of this post, I stripped my local repo down to a bare minimum, with a single package in it :

$ tree /tmp/test/
/tmp/test/
├── dists
│   ├── bookworm
│   │   ├── main
│   │   │   ├── binary-amd64
│   │   │   │   └── Packages
│   │   │   │   ├── Packages.gz
│   │   │   └── Contents-amd64.gz
│   │   └── Release
│   └── stable -> bookworm/
└── pool
    └── main
        └── abcde_2.9.3-1_all.deb

My sources.list file :

deb [trusted=yes] file:/tmp/test/ bookworm main

apt update fetches correctly Release and Packages.gz (so my repo is functional), but it doesn't even try to fetch Contents-amd64.gz :

$ sudo apt update 
Get:1 file:/tmp/test bookworm InRelease
Ign:1 file:/tmp/test bookworm InRelease
Get:2 file:/tmp/test bookworm Release [1 913 B]
Get:2 file:/tmp/test bookworm Release [1 913 B]
Get:3 file:/tmp/test bookworm Release.gpg
Ign:3 file:/tmp/test bookworm Release.gpg
Get:4 file:/tmp/test bookworm/main amd64 Packages [1 039 B]
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree... Done
Reading state information... Done
All packages are up to date.

Yet Contents-amd64.gz seems to be correctly referenced in the Release file :

$ cat dists/bookworm/Release 
(...)
MD5Sum:
 (...)
 2b43(...)8733    236 main/Contents-amd64.gz
SHA1:
 (...)
 9464(...)2e9d    236 main/Contents-amd64.gz
SHA256:
 (...)
 f48f(...)4135    236 main/Contents-amd64.gz
SHA512:
 (...)
 5253(...)fa43    236 main/Contents-amd64.gz

Any idea why it doesn't get fetched ? What did I miss when setting up my local repo ?

I set up a local repo for Debian packages, following that recipe . It works fine, except that I don't know how to mix multiple sections (e.g., main, contrib, etc.) in one single aptgenerate.conf file. What I did, and what works, was to create a different aptgenerate.conf file for each section, for example aptgenerate-main.conf for section main :

Dir::ArchiveDir ".";
Dir::CacheDir "/tmp";
TreeDefault::Directory "pool/main"; 
Default::Packages::Extensions ".deb";
Default::Packages::Compress ". gzip bzip2";
Default::Contents::Compress "gzip bzip2";

BinDirectory "dists/bookworm/main/binary-amd64" {
  Packages "dists/bookworm/main/binary-amd64/Packages";
  Contents "dists/bookworm/main/Contents-amd64";
};

Tree "dists/bookworm" {
  Sections "main";
  Architectures "amd64";
};

And aptgenerate-contrib.conf for section contrib :

Dir::ArchiveDir ".";
Dir::CacheDir "/tmp";
TreeDefault::Directory "pool/contrib"; 
Default::Packages::Extensions ".deb";
Default::Packages::Compress ". gzip bzip2";
Default::Contents::Compress "gzip bzip2";

BinDirectory "dists/bookworm/contrib/binary-amd64" {
  Packages "dists/bookworm/contrib/binary-amd64/Packages";
  Contents "dists/bookworm/contrib/Contents-amd64";
};

Tree "dists/bookworm" {
  Sections "contrib";
  Architectures "amd64";
};

It works fine :

$ apt-ftparchive generate -c=aptftp.conf aptgenerate-main.conf 
 dists/bookworm/main/binary-amd64: New 34 B 0 files 0 B 0s
 pool/main: 32 files 16,6 MB 0s
Packages done, Starting contents.
 dists/bookworm/main/Contents-amd64: 64 files 33,2 MB 1s
Done. 16,6 MB in 32 archives. Took 1s

$ apt-ftparchive generate -c=aptftp.conf aptgenerate-contrib.conf
 dists/bookworm/contrib/binary-amd64: New 34 B 0 files 0 B 0s
 pool/contrib: 6 files 393 kB 0s
Packages done, Starting contents.
 dists/bookworm/contrib/Contents-amd64: 12 files 787 kB 0s
Done. 393 kB in 6 archives. Took 0s

In my example, I had 32 packages in section main, and 6 packages in section contrib, and it generated Packages and Content files accordingly. Now, I wonder if there's a syntaxe to mix both section in a single aptgenerate.conf file, and do everything in a single run. I tried :

Dir::ArchiveDir ".";
Dir::CacheDir "/tmp";
TreeDefault::Directory "pool/";
Default::Packages::Extensions ".deb";
Default::Packages::Compress ". gzip bzip2";
Default::Contents::Compress "gzip bzip2";

BinDirectory "dists/bookworm/main/binary-amd64" {
  Packages "dists/bookworm/main/binary-amd64/Packages";
  Contents "dists/bookworm/main/Contents-amd64";
};

BinDirectory "dists/bookworm/contrib/binary-amd64" {
  Packages "dists/bookworm/contrib/binary-amd64/Packages";
  Contents "dists/bookworm/contrib/Contents-amd64";
};

Tree "dists/bookworm" {
  Sections "main contrib";
  Architectures "amd64";
};

But it generated twice the same Packages and Content files, with each time the whole 38 packages (32+6).

$ apt-ftparchive generate -c=aptftp.conf aptgenerate.conf
 dists/bookworm/main/binary-amd64: New 34 B 0 files 0 B 0s
 dists/bookworm/contrib/binary-amd64: New 34 B 0 files 0 B 0s
 pool/: 38 files 17,0 MB 0s
 pool/: 38 files 17,0 MB 0s
Packages done, Starting contents.
 dists/bookworm/main/Contents-amd64: New 86,6 kB 76 files 34,0 MB 1s
 dists/bookworm/contrib/Contents-amd64: New 86,6 kB 76 files 34,0 MB 1s
Done. 34,0 MB in 76 archives. Took 2s

Packages and Content are identical for each section :

$ diff dists/bookworm/main/binary-amd64/Packages dists/bookworm/contrib/binary-amd64/Packages
$

$ diff dists/bookworm/main/Contents-amd64.gz dists/bookworm/contrib/Contents-amd64.gz
$

This is probably due to the TreeDefault::Directory "pool/"; config. What would be the syntax to use pool/main for main, and pool/contrib for contrib ?

This is intended to be a sources list for a lab, learning, and testing machine for Debian 12 Bookworm. It should include all possible repositories from official Debian servers only. The entries are categorized, each with a description, and listed as separate single entries, not combined like: deb https://deb.debian.org/debian bookworm main contrib non-free non-free-firmware So that each component can be individually commented out if needed. Have I missed anything and an this list be further expanded or improved?

## All Debian Package Sources by Category
##
## deb     = binary packages | apt install
## deb-src = source packages | build & patches

##
## MAIN STABLE
## Officially supported free and open-source software from the current stable Debian release

deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm main
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm main

deb https://deb.debian.org/debian-security  bookworm-security main
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian-security  bookworm-security main

deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm-updates main
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm-updates main

##
## CONTRIB
## Free software that depends on non-free packages to work

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm contrib
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm contrib

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian-security  bookworm-security contrib
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian-security  bookworm-security contrib

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm-updates contrib
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm-updates contrib

##
## NON-FREE
## Software that does not fully comply with Debian Free Software Guidelines (DFSG)

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm non-free
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm non-free

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian-security  bookworm-security non-free
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian-security  bookworm-security non-free

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm-updates non-free
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm-updates non-free

##
## NON-FREE-FIRMWARE
## Proprietary firmware needed by some hardware to function correctly

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm non-free-firmware
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm non-free-firmware

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian-security  bookworm-security non-free-firmware
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian-security  bookworm-security non-free-firmware

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm-updates non-free-firmware
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm-updates non-free-firmware

##
## BACKPORTS
## Newer versions of packages from testing/unstable, recompiled for stable

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm-backports main
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm-backports main

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm-backports contrib
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm-backports contrib

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm-backports non-free
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm-backports non-free

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm-backports non-free-firmware
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm-backports non-free-firmware

##
## PROPOSED UPDATES
## Candidate updates for the next stable point release, pending validation

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm-proposed-updates main
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm-proposed-updates main

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm-proposed-updates contrib
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm-proposed-updates contrib

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm-proposed-updates non-free
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm-proposed-updates non-free

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm-proposed-updates non-free-firmware
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  bookworm-proposed-updates non-free-firmware

##
## TESTING
## Next Debian release in preparation; more up-to-date but less tested than stable

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  testing main
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  testing main

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  testing contrib
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  testing contrib

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  testing non-free
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  testing non-free

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  testing non-free-firmware
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  testing non-free-firmware

##
## UNSTABLE (SID)
## Actively developed Debian branch with the latest package versions; may break

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  unstable main
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  unstable main

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  unstable contrib
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  unstable contrib

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  unstable non-free
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  unstable non-free

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  unstable non-free-firmware
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  unstable non-free-firmware

##
## EXPERIMENTAL
## Highly unstable packages under early testing; may break systems

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  experimental main
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  experimental main

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  experimental contrib
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  experimental contrib

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  experimental non-free
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  experimental non-free

#deb https://deb.debian.org/debian  experimental non-free-firmware
#deb-src https://deb.debian.org/debian  experimental non-free-firmware

I'm facing with the following error using docker on my Linux Ubuntu system. ubuntu@ubuntu:~$ docker version Client: Docker Engine - Community Version: 28.0.1 API version: 1.48 Go version: go1.23.6 Git commit: 068a01e Built: Wed Feb 26 10:41:08 2025 OS/Arch: linux/amd64 Context: default ubuntu@ubuntu:~$ docker images REPOSITORY TAG IMAGE ID CREATED SIZE yangsuite-one-container latest 604c66275985 7 weeks ago 2.7GB ubuntu 22.04 a24be041d957 3 months ago 77.9MB carlo-ubuntu latest 1245a5e87e81 5 months ago 608MB ubuntu_iperf latest 072ecc269646 7 months ago 387MB debian latest 617f2e89852e 7 months ago 117MB ubuntu 20.04 6013ae1a63c2 7 months ago 72.8MB networkstatic/iperf3 latest 377c80503c6d 12 months ago 82MB ios-xr/xrd-control-plane 7.11.2 58b64211c345 14 months ago 1.29GB ubuntu 18.04 f9a80a55f492 24 months ago 63.2MB ubuntu@ubuntu:~$ ubuntu@ubuntu:~$ docker inspect ios-xr/xrd-control-plane [] Error: No such object: ios-xr/xrd-control-plane ubuntu@ubuntu:~$ ubuntu@ubuntu:~$ docker inspect "ios-xr/xrd-control-plane" [] Error: No such object: ios-xr/xrd-control-plane ubuntu@ubuntu:~$ As you can see, when I try to access/inspect the tagged image ios-xr/xrd-control-plane I get an error. Which is actually the problem ?

While i am intalling postgresql repo,i am facing the below.i tried with dowload and install but no luck.please give any suggestions.

yum install https://download.postgresql.org/pub/repos/yum/9.4/redhat/rhel-7-x86_64/pgdg-centos94-9.4-3.noarch.rpm 
Loaded plugins: langpacks, product-id
Cannot open: https://download.postgresql.org/pub/repos/yum/9.4/redhat/rhel-7-x86_64/pgdg-centos94-9.4-3.noarch.rpm . Skipping.
Error: Nothing to do


OS version:

      Chassis: desktop
        Machine ID: 7ccded75cb2544e8ad10a4232b335eeb
           Boot ID: b2f5934d56a54b728467bfd461cb0f90
    Virtualization: microsoft
  Operating System: Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server 7.0 (Maipo)
       CPE OS Name: cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:7.0:GA:server
            Kernel: Linux 3.10.0-123.el7.x86_64
      Architecture: x86_64

I'm trying to collect apk packages to local repo to install them later. But apk update says that this repo directory does not exists (what is not true). It does not depend on actual location and is very strange Run alpine:

docker run -it --rm alpine:latest sh

Create repo inside and try to use it:

/ # mkdir /repo
/ # apk fetch --recursive -o /repo screen
WARNING: opening from cache https://dl-cdn.alpinelinux.org/alpine/v3.21/main : No such file or directory
WARNING: opening from cache https://dl-cdn.alpinelinux.org/alpine/v3.21/community : No such file or directory
screen: unable to select package (or its dependencies)
/ # apk update
fetch https://dl-cdn.alpinelinux.org/alpine/v3.21/main/x86_64/APKINDEX.tar.gz 
fetch https://dl-cdn.alpinelinux.org/alpine/v3.21/community/x86_64/APKINDEX.tar.gz 
v3.21.3-357-g39d49089a10 [https://dl-cdn.alpinelinux.org/alpine/v3.21/main] 
v3.21.3-358-g5686bc96b73 [https://dl-cdn.alpinelinux.org/alpine/v3.21/community] 
OK: 25396 distinct packages available
/ # apk fetch --recursive -o /repo screen
Downloading libncursesw-6.5_p20241006-r3
Downloading linux-pam-1.6.1-r1
Downloading musl-1.2.5-r9
Downloading ncurses-terminfo-base-6.5_p20241006-r3
Downloading screen-5.0.0-r0
Downloading skalibs-libs-2.14.3.0-r0
Downloading utmps-libs-0.1.2.3-r2
/ # cd repo
/repo # ls -lah
total 1M     
drwxr-xr-x    2 root     root        4.0K Apr 21 17:54 .
drwxr-xr-x    1 root     root          63 Apr 21 17:53 ..
-rw-r--r--    1 root     root      154.9K Nov 11 17:11 libncursesw-6.5_p20241006-r3.apk
-rw-r--r--    1 root     root      191.0K Oct 30 12:34 linux-pam-1.6.1-r1.apk
-rw-r--r--    1 root     root      401.7K Feb 13 17:58 musl-1.2.5-r9.apk
-rw-r--r--    1 root     root       20.8K Nov 11 17:11 ncurses-terminfo-base-6.5_p20241006-r3.apk
-rw-r--r--    1 root     root      431.5K Oct 30 12:35 screen-5.0.0-r0.apk
-rw-r--r--    1 root     root       76.2K Oct 30 12:35 skalibs-libs-2.14.3.0-r0.apk
-rw-r--r--    1 root     root        4.9K Oct 30 12:35 utmps-libs-0.1.2.3-r2.apk
/repo # apk index -vU -o APKINDEX.tar.gz *.apk
Index has 0 packages (of which 7 are new)
/repo # apk update
fetch https://dl-cdn.alpinelinux.org/alpine/v3.21/main/x86_64/APKINDEX.tar.gz 
fetch https://dl-cdn.alpinelinux.org/alpine/v3.21/community/x86_64/APKINDEX.tar.gz 
v3.21.3-357-g39d49089a10 [https://dl-cdn.alpinelinux.org/alpine/v3.21/main] 
v3.21.3-358-g5686bc96b73 [https://dl-cdn.alpinelinux.org/alpine/v3.21/community] 
OK: 25396 distinct packages available
/repo # echo "/repo" >> /etc/apk/repositories
/repo # apk update
fetch https://dl-cdn.alpinelinux.org/alpine/v3.21/main/x86_64/APKINDEX.tar.gz 
fetch https://dl-cdn.alpinelinux.org/alpine/v3.21/community/x86_64/APKINDEX.tar.gz 
WARNING: opening /repo: No such file or directory
v3.21.3-357-g39d49089a10 [https://dl-cdn.alpinelinux.org/alpine/v3.21/main] 
v3.21.3-358-g5686bc96b73 [https://dl-cdn.alpinelinux.org/alpine/v3.21/community] 
OK: 25396 distinct packages available

I'm using Kali for Windows (long story) and I cannot seem to install anything due to invalid signatures. The gpg tool isn't even installed, so I can't use gpg to validate signatures. I have tried the following, with no luck:

# sudo apt -o Acquire::AllowInsecureRepositories=true \
> -o Acquire::AllowDowngradeToInsecureRepositories=true \
> update
Get:1 http://kali.download/kali  kali-rolling InRelease [30.5 kB]
Err:1 http://kali.download/kali  kali-rolling InRelease
  The following signatures were invalid: EXPKEYSIG ED444FF07D8D0BF6 Kali Linux Repository 
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
All packages are up to date.
W: An error occurred during the signature verification. The repository is not updated and the previous index files will be used. GPG error: http://kali.download/kali  kali-rolling InRelease: The following signatures were invalid: EXPKEYSIG ED444FF07D8D0BF6 Kali Linux Repository 
W: Failed to fetch http://http.kali.org/kali/dists/kali-rolling/InRelease   The following signatures were invalid: EXPKEYSIG ED444FF07D8D0BF6 Kali Linux Repository 
W: Some index files failed to download. They have been ignored, or old ones used instead.

I've also tried the following, with an error as well:

# wget -q -O - https://archive.kali.org/archive-key.asc  | apt-key add
E: gnupg, gnupg2 and gnupg1 do not seem to be installed, but one of them is required for this operation

I am building a Yum repository to install RPM packages. I am creating a folder mkdir -p ~/yum/el7/x86_64 and moving rpm file to it under same path given above. ### Here is my my-app.repo file info. [my-app] name=My App baseurl=https://dl.my-app.com/yum/el7/$basearch gpgkey=https://dl.my-app.com/rpm.gpg gpgcheck=1 enabled=1 repo_gpgcheck=1 ### Here is the error I get when I install the package. [root@ip-192-31-59-132 ~]# yum install my-app Loaded plugins: langpacks, priorities, update-motd Resolving Dependencies --> Running transaction check ---> Package my-app.x86_64 0:1.3.15-2.el7 will be installed --> Finished Dependency Resolution Dependencies Resolved ================================================================================================================================================================================== Package Arch Version Repository Size ================================================================================================================================================================================== Installing: my-app x86_64 1.3.15-2.el7 my-app 9.5 M Transaction Summary ================================================================================================================================================================================== Install 1 Package Total download size: 9.5 M Installed size: 33 M Is this ok [y/d/N]: y Downloading packages: my-app-1.3.15-2.el7.x8 FAILED https://dl.my-app.com/yum/el7/x86_64/my-app-1.3.15-2.el7.x86_64.rpm : [Errno -1] Package does not match intended download. Suggestion: run yum --enablerepo=my-app clean metadata Trying other mirror. Error downloading packages: my-app-1.3.15-2.el7.x86_64: [Errno 256] No more mirrors to try. [root@ip-192-31-59-132 ~]# I have the Gnupg configuration correct. I hope thats not the cause of this issue. What am I doing wrong here? Why is Yum throwing Package does not match intended download error?

dear friends and colleges, I want to share with you the following issue , and I am sure this important to some of the colleges here I want to verify the that all repo in my linux machine are ok so we run the command - **yum repolist** as the following we can see the errors about one of the repo yum repolist Loaded plugins: langpacks, product-id, search-disabled-repos, subscription-manager This system is not registered to Red Hat Subscription Management. You can use subscription-manager to register. file:///var/repoha/bility/h5th5th54/repodata/repomd.xml: [Errno 14] curl#37 - "Couldn't open file /var/repoha/bility/h5th5th54/repodata/repomd.xml" Trying other mirror. file:///var/repoha/bility/h5th5th54/repodata/repomd.xml: [Errno 14] curl#37 - "Couldn't open file /var/repoha/bility/h5th5th54/repodata/repomd.xml" Trying other mirror. Storage | 4.1 kB 00:00:00 Storage/group_gz | 4.9 kB 00:00:00 Storage/primary_db | 29 kB 00:00:00 local | 4.1 kB 00:00:00 local/group_gz | 136 kB 00:00:00 local/primary_db | 3.6 MB 00:00:00 repo id repo name status bility Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 7.2 (Maipo) - bility 0 Storage Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 7.2 (Maipo) - Storage 37 local Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 7.2 (Maipo) - Local 4,620 repolist: 4,657 so in order to verify if repo are ok or not we want to check the status of $? [root@trump yum.repos.d]# echo $? 0 but we get 0 why we get "0" ? in-spite repo isn't correct? ***my question is how to identify wrong/bad repo in my linux machine ?***

Below is the part of bash log, the full log can be achieved at https://gist.github.com/limkokhole/f2a423112aa005f10862 : [xiaobai@xiaobai hello]$ dnf --verbose download --source readline cachedir: /var/cache/dnf Loaded plugins: noroot, needs-restarting, reposync, copr, playground, kickstart, Query, generate_completion_cache, builddep, download, config-manager, protected_packages, system-upgrade, debuginfo-install DNF version: 0.6.4 repo: using cache for: spot-chromium not found deltainfo for: Copr repo for chromium owned by spot not found updateinfo for: Copr repo for chromium owned by spot repo: using cache for: rpmfusion-nonfree-updates-testing not found deltainfo for: RPM Fusion for Fedora 21 - Nonfree - Test Updates not found updateinfo for: RPM Fusion for Fedora 21 - Nonfree - Test Updates repo: using cache for: updates-source ... not found deltainfo for: RPM Fusion for Fedora 21 - Nonfree - Updates Source not found updateinfo for: RPM Fusion for Fedora 21 - Nonfree - Updates Source readline-6.3-5.fc21.src.rpm 623 kB/s | 2.4 MB 00:03 [xiaobai@xiaobai hello]$ I've tried dnf info too, the url http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/php/chet/readline/rltop.html is not a repo url: [xiaobai@xiaobai hello]$ dnf info readline [sudo] password for xiaobai: Using metadata from Thu Dec 31 19:18:09 2015 (6:13:33 hours old) Installed Packages Name : readline Arch : i686 Epoch : 0 Version : 6.3 Release : 5.fc21 Size : 446 k Repo : @System Summary : A library for editing typed command lines URL : http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/php/chet/readline/rltop.html License : GPLv3+ Description : The Readline library provides a set of functions that allow users to : edit command lines. Both Emacs and vi editing modes are available. The : Readline library includes additional functions for maintaining a list : of previously-entered command lines for recalling or editing those : lines, and for performing csh-like history expansion on previous : commands. Name : readline Arch : x86_64 Epoch : 0 Version : 6.3 Release : 5.fc21 Size : 483 k Repo : @System Summary : A library for editing typed command lines URL : http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/php/chet/readline/rltop.html License : GPLv3+ Description : The Readline library provides a set of functions that allow users to : edit command lines. Both Emacs and vi editing modes are available. The : Readline library includes additional functions for maintaining a list : of previously-entered command lines for recalling or editing those : lines, and for performing csh-like history expansion on previous : commands. [xiaobai@xiaobai hello]$ How can i know which url or domain has been chosen to download this readline-6.3-5.fc21.src.rpm ? --verbose doesn't seem to show the link. And how can i get this url information from dnf history in future after exit the bash session ?

$apt install libwebkit2gtk-4.0-37
output :
Package libwebkit2gtk-4.0-37 is not available, but is referred to by another package.
This may mean that the package is missing, has been obsoleted, or
is only available from another source

Error: Package 'libwebkit2gtk-4.0-37' has no installation candidate

I'm trying to install the libwebkit2gtk-4.0-37, any solution ? i'm using Kali linux

$uname -a
Linux kali 5.19.0-kali2-amd64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 5.19.11-1kali2 (2022-10-10) x86_64 GNU/Linux

I'm using Kali 2024, and trying to update but I receive the following errors. I tried everything mentioned on other's comments but I'm still unable to update. I'd appreciate it if anyone could help. ┌──(root㉿kali)-[~] └─# apt-get update Ign:2 http://http.kali.org/kali kali-rolling InRelease Err:3 http://http.kali.org/kali kali-rolling Release Redirection from https to 'http://kali.download/kali/dists/kali-rolling/Release ' is forbidden [IP: 18.211.24.19 443] Ign:1 http://www.kali.org/kali kali-rolling InRelease Err:4 http://www.kali.org/kali kali-rolling Release 404 Not Found [IP: 104.18.4.159 443] Reading package lists... Done E: The repository 'https://http.kali.org/kali kali-rolling Release' does not have 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. E: The repository 'http://kali.org/kali kali-rolling Release' does not have 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. N: Repository 'Kali Linux' changed its 'firmware component' value from 'non-free' to 'non-free-firmware' N: More information about this can be found online at: https://www.kali.org/blog/non-free-firmware-transition/ This is also my sources.list: ──(root㉿kali)-[~] └─# cat /etc/apt/sources.list # See http://www.kali.org/docs/general-use/kali-linux-sources-list-repositories/ deb https://http.kali.org/kali kali-rolling main contrib non-free non-free-firmware # Additional line for source packages deb-src http://kali.org/kali kali-rolling main contrib non-free non-free-firmware and also there's nothing on my sources.list.d directory. Any idea?

My computer has Linux Mint 19.1 Tessa with R version 3.6.3. I am trying to do sudo apt-get update and I am having this error:

Err:21 https://cloud.r-project.org/bin/linux/ubuntu  bionic Release             
  404  Not Found [IP: 2600:9000:2045:e400:6:c2d3:f940:93a1 443]
E: The repository 'https://cloud.r-project.org/bin/linux/ubuntu  bionic Release' does not have a Release file.
N: Updating from such a repository can't be done securely, and is therefore disabled by default.

Also, I would like to install appropriate drivers but I am also getting this error:

E:The repository 'https://cloud.r-project.org/bin/linux/ubuntu  bionic Release' does not have a Release file.

` Could someone help me? I remember that I had a problem upgrading R, but I am not sure what happened with Release. R now is working normally I think.

I'm using a Debian-based OS distribution (Devuan, to be specific). I'm trying to use the apt-add-repository Python-based program, which is part of the software-properties-common package . Unfortunately, running it - fails, and I get:

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/bin/apt-add-repository", line 361, in 
    addaptrepo = AddAptRepository()
  File "/usr/bin/apt-add-repository", line 39, in __init__
    self.distro.get_sources(self.sourceslist)
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/aptsources/distro.py", line 92, in get_sources
    raise NoDistroTemplateException(
    ......
    )
aptsources.distro.NoDistroTemplateException: Error: could not find a distribution template for devuan/excalibur ceres

I've gone over the script itself - the "templates" are not there; I've also looked through a couple of potential files it imports, also no luck, or perhaps I've missed something. My questions: * Where are those "distribution templates" actually located? * How can I add a template to suit my distribution?

For my job, I am using a series of devices mounting Debian 9 stretch. I hear about the rsync's vulnerability, which our devices use. I read in the Debian announcement that Bullseye (11) is not affected. However, in the announcement about the same topic for Ubuntu, it is said that the affected versions upstream of rsync are from 3.1.0 to at least 3.2.7, i.e. from 2014 to now, so I would expect also the upstream Debian versions to be affected as well. For instance, I can see my devices use rsync 3.1.2. So my question is: can I be sure that pre-Bullseye versions of Debian are unaffected (due to, I guess, different patches applied with respect to Ubuntu?), or should I compile from source the new version of rsync, to be sure?

## *CONTEXT* With a local package repository, I'm able to provide my APT instances with a set of software packages and configurations from a server which I control, allowing any client to install this software using just the normal apt install command (providing the repository is added to their /etc/apt/sources.list{,.d/}). For my attempt at creating a local package repository, I followed this tutorial on bipmedia.com, which roughly consists of: 1. Generate the .deb 2. Store the .deb on an Apache2 web server 3. Generate a Package.gz file ### My Attempt #### Generating the binary package file To generate the .deb, the software files are required, a DEBIAN folder with metadata is generated and the following command compiles the code and assembles the package: dpkg-deb --build [*source code tree with DEBIAN directory*] #### Serve repository files with Apache2 server _I'm skipping this part as it's unrelated to the problem I'm seeking to solve with this question._ #### Generating a Packages.gz file (repository metadata) With the an open shell instance whose working directory is the Apache server root folder containing the .deb file from above, I called: dpkg-scanpackages debian /dev/null | gzip -9c >debian/Packages.gz ## *PROBLEM* Calling apt update on the client machine, it complains with:

W: The repository 'http://example.com  packages/ Release' does not have a Release file.

This necessary file is missing in my local repository. It seems to be a register of package checksums, but after searching on the Internet, my very limited understanding of the topic kept me from being able to find out how to generate it. --- ***Note:*** My /etc/apt/sources.list file does have the following line: deb http://example.com packages/ ## *QUESTION* How do I generate the Release file for a local APT package repository?