Page 2 of 2

Re: Package-Rebuild request virtualbox-ext-pack_5.2.10 with a polite hint

Posted: Mon May 14, 2018 4:24 pm
by Stevo
fehlix wrote:
Mon May 14, 2018 2:57 pm
Stevo wrote:
Mon May 14, 2018 2:37 pm
If they do change the file from the current version, won't that change the hash?
The new build will have a new checksum, right. But they keep the old too.
I tried to explain it here already: viewtopic.php?f=108&t=44743&start=30#p447116 Have a look into the directory list and into SHA256SUMS.
They keep the old build available and do have the old and the new file and hashsum within the SHA267SUMS-file.
The file without the build-number is always a hard-link to the latest build!
Thats why better to include the build bumber to avoid the hash-mismatch error, if you have more than one build!
OK, I'll give it a try. Luckily, that package takes just a few seconds to build into debs.

Re: Package-Rebuild request virtualbox-ext-pack_5.2.10 with a polite hint

Posted: Mon May 14, 2018 4:27 pm
by fehlix
Stevo wrote:
Mon May 14, 2018 4:24 pm
OK, I'll give it a try. Luckily, that package takes just a few seconds to build into debs.
Thanks. It's probably easier to adjust/fix for you than to explain for me :puppy: uff... :snail:

Re: Package-Rebuild request virtualbox-ext-pack_5.2.10 with a polite hint

Posted: Tue May 15, 2018 2:15 am
by stsoh
@stevo, got a 'warning' question about vb5.2.12? :confused: again.

Code: Select all

$ dkms status
broadcom-sta, 6.30.223.271, 4.15.0-1-amd64, x86_64: installed
broadcom-sta, 6.30.223.271, 4.16.0-8.1-liquorix-amd64, x86_64: installed
ndiswrapper, 1.61, 4.15.0-1-amd64, x86_64: installed
ndiswrapper, 1.61, 4.16.0-8.1-liquorix-amd64, x86_64: installed
virtualbox, 5.2.12, 4.16.0-8.1-liquorix-amd64, x86_64: installed
virtualbox-guest, 5.2.12, 4.16.0-8.1-liquorix-amd64, x86_64: installed (original_module exists) (WARNING! Diff between built and installed module!)

Re: Package-Rebuild request virtualbox-ext-pack_5.2.10 with a polite hint

Posted: Tue May 15, 2018 3:56 am
by asqwerth
From about a month or more ago, VB updates got really weird (I got funny messages during updates that didn't seem to affect the actual installation/running of my VMs) and I was wondering whether it had anything to do with the fact that there was a recent change in the source of VB updated packages.

Originally, the Oracle VB repo was enabled as part of the installation if the user installed VB via MXPI Popular Apps, meaning that MX users used to get their updates directly from Oracle.

However, more recently - ever since the Meltdown/Spectre issues required newer and more frequent kernel updates - the MX Dev Team had been tweaking VB updates themselves** and then sending the updated packages to MX's own repos (or Test Repo initially). I understand it's something to do with ensuring the newer VB updates and guest additions work OOTB with the newer kernels.

Could this have caused some conflict, if Oracle updated packages were showing up faster in the updates, while MX's adjusted version was still stuck in Test Repo, meaning MX-updater won't normally see it?

Anyway, I disabled the Oracle repo for the moment and am just depending on MX's own updates, to avoid any confusion.


** Not sure how this will work out when VB guest additions start to be incorporated into the kernel by default.

Re: Package-Rebuild request virtualbox-ext-pack_5.2.10 with a polite hint

Posted: Tue May 15, 2018 7:38 am
by stsoh
anyway, removed dkms virtualbox-guest 5.2.12, 4.16.0-8.1 and install dkms virtualbox, 5.2.12, 4.15.0-1-amd64. :p should i install virtualbox-guest? :confused:

Code: Select all

$ dkms status
broadcom-sta, 6.30.223.271, 4.15.0-1-amd64, x86_64: installed
broadcom-sta, 6.30.223.271, 4.16.0-8.1-liquorix-amd64, x86_64: installed
ndiswrapper, 1.61, 4.15.0-1-amd64, x86_64: installed
ndiswrapper, 1.61, 4.16.0-8.1-liquorix-amd64, x86_64: installed
virtualbox, 5.2.12, 4.15.0-1-amd64, x86_64: installed
virtualbox, 5.2.12, 4.16.0-8.1-liquorix-amd64, x86_64: installed

Re: Package-Rebuild request virtualbox-ext-pack_5.2.10 with a polite hint

Posted: Tue May 15, 2018 7:58 am
by richb
I just installed all this and VB running perfectly.

virtualbox-guest-dkms all 5.2.6-dfsg-2~mx17+1 5.2.12-dfsg-1~mx17+1
virtualbox-ext-pack all <none> 5.2.12-1~mx17+2
install virtualbox amd64 <none> 5.2.12-dfsg-1~mx17+1
virtualbox-qt amd64 <none> 5.2.12-dfsg-1~mx17+1
virtualbox-dkms 5.2.12-dfsg-1~mx17+1

Re: Package-Rebuild request virtualbox-ext-pack_5.2.10 with a polite hint

Posted: Tue May 15, 2018 8:06 am
by stsoh
b4 vb5.2.10 ext-pack was mismatch hash due to old vs new version.
my case was properly due to some glitch, vb-guest was suppose to be for kernel 4.15.0-1, rather it went to kernel 4.16.0-8.1 during build.

Code: Select all

$ dkms status
broadcom-sta, 6.30.223.271, 4.15.0-1-amd64, x86_64: installed
broadcom-sta, 6.30.223.271, 4.16.0-8.1-liquorix-amd64, x86_64: installed
ndiswrapper, 1.61, 4.15.0-1-amd64, x86_64: installed
ndiswrapper, 1.61, 4.16.0-8.1-liquorix-amd64, x86_64: installed
virtualbox, 5.2.12, 4.15.0-1-amd64, x86_64: installed
virtualbox, 5.2.12, 4.16.0-8.1-liquorix-amd64, x86_64: installed
virtualbox-guest, 5.2.12, 4.15.0-1-amd64, x86_64: installed

Re: Package-Rebuild request virtualbox-ext-pack_5.2.10 with a polite hint

Posted: Tue May 15, 2018 8:16 am
by richb
Just reporting what worked for me. I should add MX 17.1 kernel: 4.15.9-antix.1-amd64-smp, which may be a critical factor.