Tails

#4 Updated by Anonymous 2016-11-16 15:18:26

It would be nice, next time, to have a more detailed description of the bug report ;)

What I’ve found is that, when using “Upgrade from ISO” in Debian, there is no problem.
But in Tails, the initial upgrade works, but then syslinux is not found.

sync

sync

/tmp/tmpDWCAq2/syslinux  -d syslinux /dev/sdb1
/bin/sh: 1: /tmp/tmpDWCAq2/syslinux: not found

Es gab ein Problem beim Ausführen des folgenden Befehls »/tmp/tmpDWCAq2/syslinux  -d syslinux /dev/sdb1«. 
Eine detailreichere Fehlerbeschreibung ist hier zu finden: »/tmp/tails-installer-fyzX9f«
Tails installation failed!
Es gab ein Problem beim Ausführen des folgenden Befehls »/tmp/tmpDWCAq2/syslinux  -d syslinux /dev/sdb1«. 
Eine detailreichere Fehlerbeschreibung ist hier zu finden: »/tmp/tails-installer-fyzX9f«

This seems logical, because as far as i remember, correct me if I’m wrong, we don’t include syslinux 64 bits in Tails i386.

Will investigate this further.

#5 Updated by Anonymous 2016-11-16 15:21:09

I tried this with a 2.7 ISO on a stick -> upgrading the 3.0 from the nightly build.

#6 Updated by intrigeri 2016-11-16 15:23:57

u wrote:
> This seems logical, because as far as i remember, correct me if I’m wrong, we don’t include syslinux 64 bits in Tails i386.

I think that’s correct. Tails i386 would not be able to run a 64-bit syslinux anyway.

Maybe the problem is that we’re not including a 32-bit syslinux in the 64-bit ISO (in Tails we’re using syslinux found in the ISO, instead of the system one, no? Or is it the opposite? I don’t remember, sorry!).

#7 Updated by Anonymous 2016-11-16 15:27:26

intrigeri wrote:
> u wrote:
> > This seems logical, because as far as i remember, correct me if I’m wrong, we don’t include syslinux 64 bits in Tails i386.
>
> I think that’s correct. Tails i386 would not be able to run a 64-bit syslinux anyway.
>
> Maybe the problem is that we’re not including a 32-bit syslinux in the 64-bit ISO (in Tails we’re using syslinux found in the ISO, instead of the system one, no? Or is it the opposite? I don’t remember, sorry!).

Yes you’re correct, we use syslinux from the ISO. So we need to ship a 32-bit syslinux in the 64-bit ISO.
No modification needed in tails-installer probably.

#11 Updated by intrigeri 2016-11-16 19:40:33

https://jenkins.tails.boum.org/job/build_Tails_ISO_bug-11873-upgrade-32-bit-to-64-bit-iso/ will tell us if it builds fine :)

#13 Updated by Anonymous 2016-11-17 16:18:41

Branch seems to build now, but I will have to test if syslinux-i386 is really included and if we can upgrade.

#14 Updated by intrigeri 2016-11-17 16:32:02

> Branch seems to build now, but I will have to test if syslinux-i386 is really included and if we can upgrade.

Yeah! \o/

#15 Updated by Anonymous 2016-11-17 17:56:49

Setup: Boot on Tails 2.7. Connect Tails 2.7 USB. tails-installer -> upgrade from ISO. Choose Tails 3.0 with syslinux-i386 and amd64 versions installed.

2016-11-17 17:36:55,889 [creator.py:992 (install_bootloader)] INFO: Bootloader wird installiert …
2016-11-17 17:36:55,896 [creator.py:1314 (flush_buffers)] INFO: Daten auf dem Datenträger werden synchronisiert…
2016-11-17 17:36:55,974 [creator.py:793 (unmount_device)] INFO: Eingehängtes Dateisystem auf /dev/sda1 wird ausgehängt
2016-11-17 17:36:59,652 [creator.py:300 (popen)] INFO: sync

sync

/tmp/tmpPiER9m/syslinux  -d syslinux /dev/sda1
/bin/sh: 1: /tmp/tmpPiER9m/syslinux: not found


2016-11-17 17:36:59,653 [gui.py:259 (run)] ERROR: Es gab ein Problem beim Ausführen des folgenden Befehls »/tmp/tmpPiER9m/syslinux  -d syslinux /dev/sda1«.
Eine detailreichere Fehlerbeschreibung ist hier zu finden: »/tmp/tails-installer-r_UQED«
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/tails_installer/gui.py", line 232, in run
    self.live.install_bootloader()
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/tails_installer/creator.py", line 1053, in install_bootloader
    'syslinux', self.drive['device']))
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/tails_installer/creator.py", line 303, in popen
    % {'command': cmd, 'filename': self._error_log_filename})
TailsInstallerError: Es gab ein Problem beim Ausf\xfchren des folgenden Befehls \xbb/tmp/tmpPiER9m/syslinux  -d syslinux /dev/sda1\xab.

But the file exists.

$ file utils/linux/syslinux*
utils/linux/syslinux:      ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2, for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, BuildID[sha1]=777388483f0fe9a43f271ca9a3ff05cf3b51845e, stripped
utils/linux/syslinux-i386: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib/ld-linux.so.2, for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, BuildID[sha1]=234287546e048776d41685fa36328d8ffe35ff7d, stripped

And we run on a 64bit kernel:

$ uname -a
Linux amnesia 4.7.0-0.bpo.1-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 4.7.8-1~bpo8+1 (2016-10-19) x86_64 GNU/Linux

It appears that the file is not executable.
Running manually `/mnt/utils/linux/syslinux-i386 -d syslinux /dev/sda1` instead of `/mnt/utils/linux/syslinux -d syslinux /dev/sda1` works.

So either we ship only the i386 binary of syslinux, because this is executable by both amd64 and i386, or we ship both and this will need a modification in tails-installer. tails-installer then needs to choose the correct syslinux depending ont the Tails we are currently running on.

What do you think?

#16 Updated by Anonymous 2016-11-17 18:05:36

Better idea: not modify the installer and just copy the 32-bit syslinux to the 64-bit executable in the hook.

#17 Updated by intrigeri 2016-11-17 18:57:40

> Better idea: not modify the installer and just copy the 32-bit syslinux to the 64-bit executable in the hook.

Sounds good. Wanna do it?

#18 Updated by Anonymous 2016-11-17 19:12:24

I made a dirty fix for that and will test it again.

#19 Updated by Anonymous 2016-11-17 20:27:19

This would be the diff we would need to revert in Tails 3.3 in order to ship only syslinux amd64, instead of shipping only the 32-bit version.

diff --git a/config/binary_local-hooks/40-include_syslinux_in_ISO_filesystem b/config/binary_local-hooks/40-include_syslinux_in_ISO_filesystem
index cab4a3f..5d1ee95 100755
--- a/config/binary_local-hooks/40-include_syslinux_in_ISO_filesystem
+++ b/config/binary_local-hooks/40-include_syslinux_in_ISO_filesystem
@@ -21,6 +21,12 @@ Set_defaults
 # Seems like we'll have work to do
 Echo_message 'including syslinux in the ISO filesystem'

+### Functions
+
+syslinux_deb_version_in_chroot () {
+   chroot chroot dpkg-query -W -f='${Version}\n' syslinux
+}
+
 ### Variables
 LINUX_BINARY_UTILS_DIR='binary/utils/linux'
 WIN32_BINARY_UTILS_DIR='binary/utils/win32'
@@ -28,16 +34,36 @@ BINARY_MBR_DIR='binary/utils/mbr'
 CHROOT_SYSLINUX_BIN='chroot/usr/bin/syslinux'
 CHROOT_SYSLINUX_MBR='chroot/usr/lib/SYSLINUX/gptmbr.bin'
 CHROOT_TEMP_APT_SOURCES='chroot/etc/apt/sources.list.d/tmp-deb-src.list'
-
-### Functions
-
-syslinux_deb_version_in_chroot () {
-   chroot chroot dpkg-query -W -f='${Version}\n' syslinux
-}
+SYSLINUX_DEB_VERSION_IN_CHROOT=$(syslinux_deb_version_in_chroot)

 ### Main
 mkdir -p "$LINUX_BINARY_UTILS_DIR" "$WIN32_BINARY_UTILS_DIR" "$BINARY_MBR_DIR"
-cp "$CHROOT_SYSLINUX_BIN" "$LINUX_BINARY_UTILS_DIR/"
+# Copy 64-but syslinux binary
+# We only need the 32-bit binary until most of the users have upgraded to 64-bit
+# Copy 32-bit syslinux binary
+(
+   olddir=$(pwd)
+   workdir=$(mktemp -d)
+   cd "$workdir"
+   chroot="$olddir/chroot"
+   echo "Configuring APT architectures for the installation of syslinux"
+   Chroot "$chroot" \
+      echo 'APT::Architectures {"i386"; "amd64";};' \
+      > /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/13architectures
+   Chroot "$chroot" dpkg --add-architecture amd64
+   Chroot "$chroot" apt-get update
+   echo "Trying to download syslinux-i386 version ${SYSLINUX_DEB_VERSION_IN_CHROOT}"
+   Chroot "$chroot" \
+      apt-get --yes download \
+      syslinux:i386="${SYSLINUX_DEB_VERSION_IN_CHROOT}"
+   echo "Extracting syslinux-i386"
+   dpkg-deb --extract "$chroot"/syslinux_*.deb .
+   rm "$chroot"/syslinux_*.deb
+   cp ./usr/bin/syslinux "$olddir/$LINUX_BINARY_UTILS_DIR/"
+   cd "$olddir"
+   rm -r "$workdir"
+)
+# Copy syslinux MBR
 cp "$CHROOT_SYSLINUX_MBR" "$BINARY_MBR_DIR/mbr.bin"

 cat chroot/etc/apt/sources.list chroot/etc/apt/sources.list.d/*.list \

#21 Updated by Anonymous 2016-11-17 22:34:18

Tested using https://nightly.tails.boum.org/build_Tails_ISO_bug-11873-upgrade-32-bit-to-64-bit-iso/lastSuccessful/archive/build-artifacts/tails-amd64-bug_11873%2bupgrade_32-bit_to_64-bit_ISO-3.0-20161117T1912Z-c2eb7bd%2bfeature_stretch%4064c0e9b.iso

#23 Updated by intrigeri 2016-11-18 10:04:12

Thanks! I’ve polished the branch a tiny bit.

I’m surprised that we need to dpkg --add-architecture amd64 (my intuition tells me that dpkg --add-architecture i386 might be needed as we’re on an amd64 system, but I don’t understand why we would need to explicitly enable amd64). This might work, and be actually needed, because of a problem in config/chroot_local-hooks/99-disable-multiarch so I’ll fix Bug #11961 first and then I’ll come back here. I suspect that I’ll have to s/amd64/i386/ in the aforementioned command, as a result.

#25 Updated by Anonymous 2016-11-19 11:24:20

intrigeri wrote:
> Thanks! I’ve polished the branch a tiny bit.

<3

> I’m surprised that we need to dpkg --add-architecture amd64 (my intuition tells me that dpkg --add-architecture i386 might be needed as we’re on an amd64 system, but I don’t understand why we would need to explicitly enable amd64). This might work, and be actually needed, because of a problem in config/chroot_local-hooks/99-disable-multiarch so I’ll fix Bug #11961 first and then I’ll come back here. I suspect that I’ll have to s/amd64/i386/ in the aforementioned command, as a result.

Indeed, that’s a mistake! I wanted to add the i386 architecture. But - it worked, so actually, we might even be able to delete this line.

#27 Updated by intrigeri 2016-11-20 06:37:10

Since I’ve merged this branch, the USB install & upgrade tests fail: https://jenkins.tails.boum.org/view/Tails_ISO/job/test_Tails_ISO_feature-stretch/33/. The extracted syslinux binary apparently cannot be run.

#32 Updated by intrigeri 2017-07-25 09:24:49

Will revert this in Feature #13513.