When trying to upgrade from October 19 to April 20, do-release-upgrade says "No new version found".

So I'm trying to upgrade from 19.10 to 20.04, but when I do-release-upgrade it says "No new version found".

I'm pretty sure that version 20.04 is coming out, almost two years later. Why can't she find it?
When I run "lsb_release -a" it clearly shows "Ubuntu 19.10".

In my file / etc / update-manager / release-upgradees there is clearly Prompt = normal.

What's happening?

pip – pip3 points to the wrong version of Python

i have installed python3.8 and have found no clue on how to get pip3 to keep talking ubuntu. On macos I had explicitly installed pip3.8 and that was crucial to properly align all of the packages.

pip3 was installed based on numerous recommendations as follows:

    sudo apt-get install python3-pip

But it shows python3.6::

$ pip3 -V
pip 9.0.1 from /usr/lib/python3/dist-packages (python 3.6)

Please don't suggest anaconda or venv: There are reasons why we use installed directly python3.8.

export – Exports a chart as .eps in the cloud version

Nice day,

I am an absolute beginner with Mathematica and in the desktop version I can simply select my diagram and export it as .eps. I can't figure out how to do it in the cloud version, just right click and save it as .png.
For example, I run Shift + Enter and export it to the desktop, but I have no idea how the cloud version works.

opendkim – openssl .so library version incompatible

I upgraded from openssl-1.0.0 to openssl-1.1.1d
However, Opendkim supports openssl-1.0. So some changes were made and compiled.
Compiling was okay.
When I try to run the binary, it sometimes runs. Most of the time, however, the following error occurred.

libcrypto.so.10: Version `libcrypto.so.10 & # 39; not found (libopendkim.so.10). No file or directory named libcrypto.so.10

So I created a symlink file libcrypto.so.10 that points to libcrypto.so.1.1, but the following error occurred.

libcrypto.so.10: Version `libcrypto.so.10 & # 39; not found (libopendkim.so.10)

I couldn't get through this mistake. Any help is greatly appreciated.

adb – How do I get all process PIDs on the current Android version?

Previously with Android KitKat or Marshmallow, commands like ps -a or htop returned the full process tree along the threads and zygote and init.

Now, however, only the processes of the app from which they were started are returned (also as root), while the complete PID list remains legible under /proc.

How do I re-list the full process list?

Version control – problem with Drupal 7 Composer dependencies

When trying to install a juicebox that requires libraries, the dependencies do not result in a working configuration. This is because Juicebox defines a version requirement in the .info file that is not translated correctly into the corresponding Composer restriction.

Juicebox defines it dependencies as follows:

core = 7.x
dependencies() = image
dependencies() = libraries (>1.0)

This means that any version of libraries higher than 1.0 would work (i.e. 1.1, 2.0).

The following versions are installed when installing libraries and Juicebox with Composer:

"name": "drupal/juicebox",
"version": "dev-2.x",

"name": "drupal/libraries",
"version": "dev-1.x",

However, this does not correspond to the actual requirements in Drupal:

Enter the image description here

If you try to manually install the correct version of the libraries:

"drupal/juicebox": "^2.1",
"drupal/libraries": "^2.0",

it doesn't work and that composer update Outputs:

Your requirements could not be resolved to an installable set of packages.

  Problem 1
    - Conclusion: remove drupal/juicebox 2.1.0
    - Conclusion: don't install drupal/juicebox 2.1.0
    - Conclusion: don't install drupal/libraries 2.5.0
    - Conclusion: don't install drupal/libraries 2.4.0
    - Conclusion: don't install drupal/libraries 2.3.0
    - Conclusion: don't install drupal/libraries 2.2.0
    - Conclusion: don't install drupal/libraries 2.1.0
    - Conclusion: don't install drupal/libraries 2.0.0
    - Conclusion: don't install drupal/libraries 2.0.0-alpha2
    - Installation request for drupal/juicebox ^2.1 -> satisfiable by drupal/juicebox(2.x-dev, 2.1.0).
    - Conclusion: don't install drupal/libraries 2.0.0-alpha1
    - drupal/juicebox 2.x-dev requires drupal/libraries ^1.1 -> satisfiable by drupal/libraries(1.x-dev).
    - Can only install one of: drupal/libraries(1.x-dev, 2.x-dev).
    - Can only install one of: drupal/libraries(2.x-dev, 1.x-dev).
    - Installation request for drupal/libraries ^2.0 -> satisfiable by drupal/libraries(2.x-dev, 2.5.0, 2.4.0, 2.3.0, 2.2.0, 2.1.0, 2.0.0, 2.0.0-alpha2, 2.0.0-alpha1).

This clearly shows the problem, namely that > by doing juicebox.info is translated into a composer restriction of ^1.1 it's not the same:

  • ^ in the composer everything means until the next major version
  • > in drupal .info Files means everything above

I didn't know where to post this issue since Drupal forums reported it as spam and I couldn't find a repository where this was implemented.

openssl – Linux Curl SH script is broken unless I specify the TLS version

I wanted to publish this on another SE site, but I found it expressly --tlsv1.1 to curl The problem has been fixed for the time being. My question now is about security.

A provider recently switched to FTPS (not SSH FTP). I have added --ssl and --ssl-reqd on the command and I get aborted transfers when I upload a file. I am using this on an Ubuntu 18 server. This is the command I am using.

--upload-file "$FileToUpload" 

The -v The output claims that the SSL certificate from the server is OK. During the extensive downloadable edition, many duplicate messages are read on the screen

* TLSv1.3 (OUT), TLS Unknown, Unknown (23):
} ($integer bytes data)

before they're finally done with

* We are completely uploaded and fine
* Remembering we are in dir ""
< 450 Transfer aborted. Link to file server lost
* server did not report OK, got 450
* Connection #0 to host $FTPHOST left intact
curl: (18) server did not report OK, got 450

The test file $FileToUpload is 10 MB; I also generated it from "/ dev / urandom" dd. With WinSCP on my Win 10 workstation I can call up a directory list. The file size is different each time and is between 7 and 9 MB. The automated process of the provider also quickly removes the file from the server (or from them) chmod it is so that I cannot see it), so it is difficult to download it to check it with a checksum. I can easily upload the file to the server on my Win 10 workstation using WinSCP. Immediately after that, if I can download it, I'll use it

# Download

and list it

# Listing

Both end with

< 226 Transfer complete
* Connection #0 to host $FTPHOST left intact

I was looking at a package capture that was recorded on my workstation when the same file was uploaded, and nothing is really noticeable, suggesting that my curl options are wrong.

I also tried this on an Ubuntu 18 server from another network and got the same results.

# Here's where the original  #
# post would've ended before #
#     I found a/the fix.     #

I added --tlsv1.1 and it is successfully uploaded with the message every time

< 226 Transfer complete
* Connection #0 to host $FTPHOST left intact

Only this argument makes the upload work. If I replace that with one of the other TLS options -1, --tlsv1, --tlsv1.0, --tlsv1.2, --tlsv1.3I'm back to the 450 error. The original detailed edition showed Curl and $ FTPHOST negotiates with tlsv1.3. A combined package capture that specifies the work option --tlsv1.1 and do not illustrate that TLSv1.1 or TLSv1.3 are negotiated.

https: //$ FTPHOST: 443 is open, but a browser returns "SSL_ERROR_RX_RECORD_TOO_LONG".

curl -kv https://$FTPHOST/ shows possible errors:

* error:1408F10B:SSL routines:ssl3_get_record:wrong version number
* stopped the pause stream!
* Closing connection 0
curl: (35) error:1408F10B:SSL routines:ssl3_get_record:wrong version number

and openssl s_client -connect ${FTPHOST}:${PORT} -showcerts ($PORT is shown in (21,80,443))

140224622215616:error:1408F10B:SSL routines:ssl3_get_record:wrong version number:../ssl/record/ssl3_record.c:332:
no peer certificate available
No client certificate CA names sent
SSL handshake has read 5 bytes and written 322 bytes
Verification: OK
New, (NONE), Cipher is (NONE)
Secure Renegotiation IS NOT supported
Compression: NONE
Expansion: NONE
No ALPN negotiated
Early data was not sent
Verify return code: 0 (ok)

Should I contact the provider and see if they can stop using TLSv1.2 or TLSv1.3? This appears to be a misconfiguration on the server side.

The question is whether I will sacrifice the security of this script to use TLSv1.1.

Is there a Lubuntu server version?

I want to install a Linux server on my old computer (under Windows XP, Intel Atom CPU, 150 GB hard drive), but my computer cannot install the Ubuntu server 18.04.

Lubuntu is a Lite Ubuntu version, but I can't see a server version on the https://lubuntu.net/downloads/ website.

Is there a server version for Lubuntu?