Help needed after upgrade

[Davey]

As my Ubuntu 18.04 had run out of support, I decided to upgrade. First,
I could not do a straight upgrade, as the direct process was by now
unavailable . No problem, a Clean installation is the best way anyway.
I chose 22.04, as I had looked at 24.04 and couod not find some
familiar applications, so 22.04 would be a fairly seamless process.
In general, it was, but it's the final details and tweaks that confound
and take time, and lead to more time spent head-scratching than time
taken to do the base installation.
I have come up against some problems that I cannot fix, and I am hoping
that I can get some help here.

Problem 1. I cannot get a USB stick to auto-mount when plugged in. I
have followed lots of advice, some of it most confusing, and also my
desktop, which also runs Ubuntu 22.04, auto-mounts USB devices just
fine.

Problem 2. In Thunderbird, I cannot get my old (18.04) Local Folders to
show. Advice varies from that which depends on non-existent options, to
an apparently clear process which promises to work, but doesn't. I have
a folder which contains the Local Folders.

I had a Clawsmail problem, and a couple of LibreOffice problems, but I
managed to sort them out. These two remaining ones have me stumped,
even though the answers are probably simple.
Any help gratefully received and welcomed. Thanks in advance.

Thunderbird is ver. 115.18.0 (64-bit).

[Theo]

Post by Davey
Problem 1. I cannot get a USB stick to auto-mount when plugged in. I
have followed lots of advice, some of it most confusing, and also my
desktop, which also runs Ubuntu 22.04, auto-mounts USB devices just
fine.

No idea on that one. It'll be a GNOME desktop thing I assume.

Post by Davey
Problem 2. In Thunderbird, I cannot get my old (18.04) Local Folders to
show. Advice varies from that which depends on non-existent options, to
an apparently clear process which promises to work, but doesn't. I have
a folder which contains the Local Folders.

In 24.04 they've switched Thunderbird to a snap, which puts its config in a
different place ~/snap/thunderbird/common/ not your home directory. Not
sure if that also applies to 22.04, but if you have the ~/snap/thunderbird
folder you could try copying your ~/.thunderbird to be
~/snap/thunderbird/common/.thunderbird

(keep ~/.thunderbird as a backup)

Theo

[Davey]

On 14 Feb 2025 17:57:49 +0000 (GMT)

Post by Theo

Post by Davey
Problem 1. I cannot get a USB stick to auto-mount when plugged in. I
have followed lots of advice, some of it most confusing, and also my
desktop, which also runs Ubuntu 22.04, auto-mounts USB devices just
fine.

No idea on that one. It'll be a GNOME desktop thing I assume.

Post by Davey
Problem 2. In Thunderbird, I cannot get my old (18.04) Local
Folders to show. Advice varies from that which depends on
non-existent options, to an apparently clear process which promises
to work, but doesn't. I have a folder which contains the Local
Folders.

In 24.04 they've switched Thunderbird to a snap, which puts its
config in a different place ~/snap/thunderbird/common/ not your home
directory. Not sure if that also applies to 22.04, but if you have
the ~/snap/thunderbird folder you could try copying your
~/.thunderbird to be ~/snap/thunderbird/common/.thunderbird
(keep ~/.thunderbird as a backup)
Theo

Hmm. I have seen references in my readings to snap, without really
delving into it. But I see a .snap folder, but it only has snap-store,
snap-desktop-integration, and firefox. .thunderbird is nowhere to be
seen.

[Davey]

On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 19:56:00 +0000

Post by Davey
On 14 Feb 2025 17:57:49 +0000 (GMT)

Post by Theo

Post by Davey
Problem 1. I cannot get a USB stick to auto-mount when plugged
in. I have followed lots of advice, some of it most confusing,
and also my desktop, which also runs Ubuntu 22.04, auto-mounts
USB devices just fine.

No idea on that one. It'll be a GNOME desktop thing I assume.

Post by Davey
Problem 2. In Thunderbird, I cannot get my old (18.04) Local
Folders to show. Advice varies from that which depends on
non-existent options, to an apparently clear process which
promises to work, but doesn't. I have a folder which contains the
Local Folders.

In 24.04 they've switched Thunderbird to a snap, which puts its
config in a different place ~/snap/thunderbird/common/ not your home
directory. Not sure if that also applies to 22.04, but if you have
the ~/snap/thunderbird folder you could try copying your
~/.thunderbird to be ~/snap/thunderbird/common/.thunderbird
(keep ~/.thunderbird as a backup)
Theo

Hmm. I have seen references in my readings to snap, without really
delving into it. But I see a .snap folder, but it only has snap-store,
snap-desktop-integration, and firefox. .thunderbird is nowhere to be
seen.

This is getting more and more complicated. 'snap' only shows
thunderbird, no Firefox. But when I follow the directions for finding
the Profile, the first route does not have the specified menu choices,
and the method for a closed firefox shows nothing. It is as though I
have a ghostly version of Firefox, which does indeed sound correct.
So I am currently making sure that I have as much backed up as possible
(I can't back up my Firefox profile, since I can't find it), but I have
a TB profile ok.
I might try 'snap install Firefox', in case that helps, or
'snap install thunderbird'. But there are so many more problems, such as
VLC does not open the Network stream that worked before, but works on
the other PC, no Automount, ssh won't in either direction, my rsync
scripts all fail, etc. etc, that I am coming round to a choice:
1. Re-install ver 22.04 from scratch, and hope that the second attempt
is better than the first. Maybe, maybe not.
2. Install 24.04. It can't be worse than 22.04 (!), and hopefully it is
more reliable.
3. I might look at creating a /home partition, and possibly installing
24.04 alongside 22.04.
4. Maybe even try 24.04 alongside without a separate /home partition,
and see if that works any better.

Any thoughts welcome. This is costing a lot of time, and it should not
have done.

On the desktop, which appeared to have working Thunderbird Local
Folders, I can move messages to new folders that I create there, but
when I move old messages from back-up to the Local Folder files, they do
not appear. So that is no better.

[Daniel James]

I am coming round to a choice: ...

Or you could ditch Ubuntu and install Debian (on which Ubuntu is based)
or Mint (which is based on Ubuntu), neither of which supports snap by
default, and install Firefox and Thunderbird in the usual way.

Snap is supposed to solve a number of problems that can result from
incompatible versions of various dependencies being required by
different applications, but it comes with problems of its own ... and,
to be honest, in nearly 15 years of using Linux as my primary desktop
IOS I have only once run into a problem of the kind that snap solves.

For Canonical (who make Ubuntu) snap is also the mechanism behind the
snap store, which is effectively their own proprietary app store. That's
actually not a very linuxish thing.

[Davey]

On Sun, 16 Feb 2025 23:35:36 +0000

Post by Daniel James

I am coming round to a choice: ...

Or you could ditch Ubuntu and install Debian (on which Ubuntu is
based) or Mint (which is based on Ubuntu), neither of which supports
snap by default, and install Firefox and Thunderbird in the usual way.
Snap is supposed to solve a number of problems that can result from
incompatible versions of various dependencies being required by
different applications, but it comes with problems of its own ...
and, to be honest, in nearly 15 years of using Linux as my primary
desktop IOS I have only once run into a problem of the kind that snap
solves.
For Canonical (who make Ubuntu) snap is also the mechanism behind the
snap store, which is effectively their own proprietary app store.
That's actually not a very linuxish thing.

Hmm. Having just said that I do not want to learn a new system, what
you are saying seems to address the problems that I am encountering.
Maybe I'll give it a go.
Thanks.

[Daniel James]

Post by Davey
On Sun, 16 Feb 2025 23:35:36 +0000

... you could ditch Ubuntu and install Debian (on which Ubuntu is
based) or Mint (which is based on Ubuntu), neither of which supports
snap by default, and install Firefox and Thunderbird in the usual way.

[snip]

Post by Davey
Hmm. Having just said that I do not want to learn a new system, what
you are saying seems to address the problems that I am encountering.

How different it will be depends rather on which desktop environment you
are using with Ubuntu. If it's the default Unity-like configuration of
Gnome 3 there is nothing quite like it in Debian or Mint, but switching
from (say) KUbuntu to Debian with KDE will not be very different at all.

I use Debian with Mate, which looks and feels pretty similar to the way
Ubuntu did when I used to use it (about a decade ago) with the default
Gnome 2.

[Davey]

On Mon, 17 Feb 2025 16:59:26 +0000

Post by Daniel James

Post by Davey
On Sun, 16 Feb 2025 23:35:36 +0000

... you could ditch Ubuntu and install Debian (on which Ubuntu is
based) or Mint (which is based on Ubuntu), neither of which
supports snap by default, and install Firefox and Thunderbird in
the usual way.

[snip]

Post by Davey
Hmm. Having just said that I do not want to learn a new system, what
you are saying seems to address the problems that I am
encountering.

How different it will be depends rather on which desktop environment
you are using with Ubuntu. If it's the default Unity-like
configuration of Gnome 3 there is nothing quite like it in Debian or
Mint, but switching from (say) KUbuntu to Debian with KDE will not be
very different at all.
I use Debian with Mate, which looks and feels pretty similar to the
way Ubuntu did when I used to use it (about a decade ago) with the
default Gnome 2.

Well, I know it's Gnome, but I have no idea which one. Whatever it
came with out of the box. I can see GNOME-Shell 42.9 if that
helps.
I know I like the desktop better in earlier versions of Ubuntu, so
maybe I/m on Gnome 3 now?
I have prepared a Linux Mint USB, and I will try that sometime in the
near future.
Thanks.

--
Davey.

[Davey]

On Mon, 17 Feb 2025 16:59:26 +0000

Post by Daniel James

Post by Davey
On Sun, 16 Feb 2025 23:35:36 +0000

... you could ditch Ubuntu and install Debian (on which Ubuntu is
based) or Mint (which is based on Ubuntu), neither of which
supports snap by default, and install Firefox and Thunderbird in
the usual way.

[snip]

Post by Davey
Hmm. Having just said that I do not want to learn a new system, what
you are saying seems to address the problems that I am
encountering.

How different it will be depends rather on which desktop environment
you are using with Ubuntu. If it's the default Unity-like
configuration of Gnome 3 there is nothing quite like it in Debian or
Mint, but switching from (say) KUbuntu to Debian with KDE will not be
very different at all.
I use Debian with Mate, which looks and feels pretty similar to the
way Ubuntu did when I used to use it (about a decade ago) with the
default Gnome 2.

For now, I have a system which is basically functional.

I have the earlier installation of Ubuntu 22.04 on my newish desktop,
done a few months ago.
This one, on the daily-use laptop, was done a couple of weeks ago, from
the same USB stick. Both were clean installations.

I now have working: Facebook, Thunderbird, Clawsmail. I still cannot get
Local Folders working properly either.
Also LibreOffice and Handbrake work on both.

gFTP, which I used before to move files between my laptop and my Humax
PVR, won't work on either machine. But Filezilla does.

VLC works fine on the desktop, but will not on the laptop.

Okular works on the desktop, I have not yet tried it on the laptop.
Ditto GNU Image processor.

On the laptop, I have sorted out the failing rsync scripts, and also
restored ssh operations based on the laptop. There are lots of other
applications before that I will only try again as and when I need them.

So I am in a position where I can function almost as before, using the
laptop.
Yesterday, I ran Linux Mint on the desktop, which took ages to laod,
and at a first glance, it did not seem able to locate, and therefore
install, vlc. It did give me functioning Facebook and Thunderbird,
though. I did not try Clawsmail.
I assume that there is a different process to find and install other
programmes such as VLC, but I will not load Linux Mint again for a
while.

I now need to find how to move the Launchbar to the bottom of the
screen (GNOME?). Research later today.
And that's the state of play.

[Daniel James]

Post by Davey
Yesterday, I ran Linux Mint on the desktop, which took ages to laod,
and at a first glance, it did not seem able to locate, and therefore
install, vlc. It did give me functioning Facebook and Thunderbird,
though. I did not try Clawsmail.
I assume that there is a different process to find and install other
programmes such as VLC, but I will not load Linux Mint again for a
while.

Running any distro from a USB stick is slow, if that's what you were doing.

VLC should be no trouble ...

Mint is derived from Ubuntu is derived from Debian.

I use Debian and have in the past used Ubuntu. I have only played
briefly with Mint some years ago so I can't claim intimate knowledge of
it ... but it's a Debian-based distro, so uses apt as the package
manager and can run synaptic if you want a GUI.

Post by Davey
I now need to find how to move the Launchbar to the bottom of the
screen (GNOME?).

It depends which desktop environment you have downloaded and installed
-- is it Xfce, Mate, or Cinnamon ... or something else?

In Mate that's just a few clicks (right click on the bar, select
"Properties", change "Orientation" from "Top" to "Bottom", click
"Close") but I can't speak for other DEs (nor understand why you'd want
to do that, but each to his own).

[Davey]

On Thu, 20 Feb 2025 14:41:41 +0000

Post by Daniel James

Post by Davey
Yesterday, I ran Linux Mint on the desktop, which took ages to laod,
and at a first glance, it did not seem able to locate, and therefore
install, vlc. It did give me functioning Facebook and Thunderbird,
though. I did not try Clawsmail.
I assume that there is a different process to find and install other
programmes such as VLC, but I will not load Linux Mint again for a
while.

Running any distro from a USB stick is slow, if that's what you were doing.
VLC should be no trouble ...
Mint is derived from Ubuntu is derived from Debian.
I use Debian and have in the past used Ubuntu. I have only played
briefly with Mint some years ago so I can't claim intimate knowledge
of it ... but it's a Debian-based distro, so uses apt as the package
manager and can run synaptic if you want a GUI.

Post by Davey
I now need to find how to move the Launchbar to the bottom of the
screen (GNOME?).

It depends which desktop environment you have downloaded and
installed -- is it Xfce, Mate, or Cinnamon ... or something else?
In Mate that's just a few clicks (right click on the bar, select
"Properties", change "Orientation" from "Top" to "Bottom", click
"Close") but I can't speak for other DEs (nor understand why you'd
want to do that, but each to his own).

Thanks. I got the launchbar repositioned earlier. I tried everything to
get VLC working properly, it plays video, it just won't connect to the
DVR. VlC on the desktop works fine on all counts. I give up on that one.
I got the desktop's Thunderbird to work with the Local Folders, now to
try the same thing on the laptop.
So we are getting closer and closer...
Thanks.

[Davey]

On Thu, 20 Feb 2025 14:41:41 +0000

Post by Daniel James

Post by Davey
Yesterday, I ran Linux Mint on the desktop, which took ages to laod,
and at a first glance, it did not seem able to locate, and therefore
install, vlc. It did give me functioning Facebook and Thunderbird,
though. I did not try Clawsmail.
I assume that there is a different process to find and install other
programmes such as VLC, but I will not load Linux Mint again for a
while.

Running any distro from a USB stick is slow, if that's what you were doing.
VLC should be no trouble ...
Mint is derived from Ubuntu is derived from Debian.
I use Debian and have in the past used Ubuntu. I have only played
briefly with Mint some years ago so I can't claim intimate knowledge
of it ... but it's a Debian-based distro, so uses apt as the package
manager and can run synaptic if you want a GUI.

Post by Davey
I now need to find how to move the Launchbar to the bottom of the
screen (GNOME?).

It depends which desktop environment you have downloaded and
installed -- is it Xfce, Mate, or Cinnamon ... or something else?
In Mate that's just a few clicks (right click on the bar, select
"Properties", change "Orientation" from "Top" to "Bottom", click
"Close") but I can't speak for other DEs (nor understand why you'd
want to do that, but each to his own).

Thanks. I got the launchbar repositioned earlier. I tried everything to
get VLC working properly, it plays video, it just won't connect to the
DVR. VlC on the desktop works fine on all counts. I give up on that one.
I got the desktop's Thunderbird to work with the Local Folders, now to
try the same thing on the laptop.
So we are getting closer and closer...
Thanks.

[Davey]

On Thu, 20 Feb 2025 14:41:41 +0000

Post by Daniel James

Post by Davey
Yesterday, I ran Linux Mint on the desktop, which took ages to laod,
and at a first glance, it did not seem able to locate, and therefore
install, vlc. It did give me functioning Facebook and Thunderbird,
though. I did not try Clawsmail.
I assume that there is a different process to find and install other
programmes such as VLC, but I will not load Linux Mint again for a
while.

Running any distro from a USB stick is slow, if that's what you were doing.
VLC should be no trouble ...
Mint is derived from Ubuntu is derived from Debian.
I use Debian and have in the past used Ubuntu. I have only played
briefly with Mint some years ago so I can't claim intimate knowledge
of it ... but it's a Debian-based distro, so uses apt as the package
manager and can run synaptic if you want a GUI.

Post by Davey
I now need to find how to move the Launchbar to the bottom of the
screen (GNOME?).

It depends which desktop environment you have downloaded and
installed -- is it Xfce, Mate, or Cinnamon ... or something else?
In Mate that's just a few clicks (right click on the bar, select
"Properties", change "Orientation" from "Top" to "Bottom", click
"Close") but I can't speak for other DEs (nor understand why you'd
want to do that, but each to his own).

Ok. I have fixed some things, but I keep on finding others.
My latest problem concerns ssh and rsync.
I found that ssh would not work, and that I need to write:
ssh -v -oHostKeyAlgorithms=+ssh-rsa ***@192.168.1.164
to get to that PC.
But I can't get rsync to work, and I assume that it needs a similar
modification to the command. The fault message is exactly the same as
it was for ssh:

Unable to negotiate with 192.168.1.164 port 22: no matching host key
type found. Their offer: ssh-rsa,ssh-dss rsync: connection unexpectedly
closed (0 bytes received so far) [sender] rsync error: unexplained
error (code 255) at io.c(232) [sender=3.2.7]

But I cannot find how to do that in rsync.
Again, any help most welcome.

[Richard Kettlewell]

Post by Davey
My latest problem concerns ssh and rsync.
to get to that PC.
But I can't get rsync to work, and I assume that it needs a similar
modification to the command. The fault message is exactly the same as
Unable to negotiate with 192.168.1.164 port 22: no matching host key
type found. Their offer: ssh-rsa,ssh-dss rsync: connection unexpectedly
closed (0 bytes received so far) [sender] rsync error: unexplained
error (code 255) at io.c(232) [sender=3.2.7]
But I cannot find how to do that in rsync.
Again, any help most welcome.

ssh-rsa and ssh-dss are disabled by default because they are too
weak. Personally I would fix the server once rather than fixing every
client.

How you do that depends on the OpenSSH version running on the server.

* Anything older than OpenSSH 5.7 will need upgrading.
* For anything from 5.7 onwards you should be able to create an ECDSA
host key.
* Alternatively upgrading to OpenSSH 7.2 or later since that would
normally offer rsa-sha2-256 using your existing RSA host key.

[Davey]

On Sat, 22 Feb 2025 21:11:05 +0000

Post by Richard Kettlewell

Post by Davey
My latest problem concerns ssh and rsync.
to get to that PC.
But I can't get rsync to work, and I assume that it needs a similar
modification to the command. The fault message is exactly the same
Unable to negotiate with 192.168.1.164 port 22: no matching host key
type found. Their offer: ssh-rsa,ssh-dss rsync: connection
unexplained error (code 255) at io.c(232) [sender=3.2.7]
But I cannot find how to do that in rsync.
Again, any help most welcome.

ssh-rsa and ssh-dss are disabled by default because they are too
weak. Personally I would fix the server once rather than fixing every
client.
How you do that depends on the OpenSSH version running on the server.
* Anything older than OpenSSH 5.7 will need upgrading.
* For anything from 5.7 onwards you should be able to create an ECDSA
host key.
* Alternatively upgrading to OpenSSH 7.2 or later since that would
normally offer rsa-sha2-256 using your existing RSA host key.

Hmm. Ok, I would have had no idea of any of that. Thanks. A job for
tomorrow or Monday.
I backup my files daily using rsync to a PC with Ubuntu 8.04 (!) and
also one with 22.04. Should I do the same process to both of them? Will
the 8.04 PC even have any idea what I'm trying to do?
Much obliged.

I am looking at following the instructions in:

https://synaptica.info/en/2024/07/05/9487/

[Davey]

On Sat, 22 Feb 2025 22:47:26 +0000

Post by Davey
On Sat, 22 Feb 2025 21:11:05 +0000

Post by Richard Kettlewell

Post by Davey
My latest problem concerns ssh and rsync.
to get to that PC.
But I can't get rsync to work, and I assume that it needs a
similar modification to the command. The fault message is exactly
Unable to negotiate with 192.168.1.164 port 22: no matching host
key type found. Their offer: ssh-rsa,ssh-dss rsync: connection
unexpectedly closed (0 bytes received so far) [sender] rsync
error: unexplained error (code 255) at io.c(232) [sender=3.2.7]
But I cannot find how to do that in rsync.
Again, any help most welcome.

ssh-rsa and ssh-dss are disabled by default because they are too
weak. Personally I would fix the server once rather than fixing
every client.
How you do that depends on the OpenSSH version running on the server.
* Anything older than OpenSSH 5.7 will need upgrading.
* For anything from 5.7 onwards you should be able to create an
ECDSA host key.
* Alternatively upgrading to OpenSSH 7.2 or later since that would
normally offer rsa-sha2-256 using your existing RSA host key.

Hmm. Ok, I would have had no idea of any of that. Thanks. A job for
tomorrow or Monday.
I backup my files daily using rsync to a PC with Ubuntu 8.04 (!) and
also one with 22.04. Should I do the same process to both of them?
Will the 8.04 PC even have any idea what I'm trying to do?
Much obliged.
https://synaptica.info/en/2024/07/05/9487/

Added on to that, I run the local village Heating Oil Syndicate, with an
order to be placed tomorrow. In order to not screw that up, as it
involves a fair amount of e-mailing, I will leave this OpenSSH update
until after that is all complete. My recent experience is that anything
I try that should not affect anything else invariably will.

[Richard Kettlewell]

Post by Davey
Hmm. Ok, I would have had no idea of any of that. Thanks. A job for
tomorrow or Monday.
I backup my files daily using rsync to a PC with Ubuntu 8.04 (!) and
also one with 22.04. Should I do the same process to both of them? Will
the 8.04 PC even have any idea what I'm trying to do?
Much obliged.

That will probably have OpenSSH 4.6 or 4.7. Your best option at this
point is to upgrade the server to an Ubuntu release that is still in
support.

Post by Davey
https://synaptica.info/en/2024/07/05/9487/

Those instructions assume a much more recent operating system than
Ubuntu 8.04, they will not work unmodified for you.

[Davey]

On Sun, 23 Feb 2025 13:43:39 +0000

Post by Richard Kettlewell

Post by Davey
Hmm. Ok, I would have had no idea of any of that. Thanks. A job for
tomorrow or Monday.
I backup my files daily using rsync to a PC with Ubuntu 8.04 (!) and
also one with 22.04. Should I do the same process to both of them?
Will the 8.04 PC even have any idea what I'm trying to do?
Much obliged.

That will probably have OpenSSH 4.6 or 4.7. Your best option at this
point is to upgrade the server to an Ubuntu release that is still in
support.

Post by Davey
https://synaptica.info/en/2024/07/05/9487/

Those instructions assume a much more recent operating system than
Ubuntu 8.04, they will not work unmodified for you.

Oh great. It might be that that PC does not continue as a backup
destination for the laptop. There are alternatives.... and ssh now
works, so if only I could find out how to include the corrective ssh
command into the rsync command, I would be very happy.

Thanks.

[Daniel James]

Post by Davey
to get to that PC.

[snip]

Post by Davey
Unable to negotiate with 192.168.1.164 port 22: no matching host key
type found. Their offer: ssh-rsa,ssh-dss rsync: connection unexpectedly

What that means is that you are having to specify explicitly an old,
less secure, cipher in order to connect to 192.168.1.164 because that
machine doesn't (or isn't configured to) support the newer, more secure,
ciphers that your ssh client wants to use.

As Richard Kettlewell has said, that suggests strongly that you need to
update your server to a version that uses more secure ciphers, rather
than trying to force the client to use obsolete ones.

What OS is 192.168.1.164 running? It sounds as though it must be pretty old.

[Davey]

On Sun, 23 Feb 2025 13:27:47 +0000

Post by Daniel James

Post by Davey
to get to that PC.

[snip]

Post by Davey
Unable to negotiate with 192.168.1.164 port 22: no matching host key
type found. Their offer: ssh-rsa,ssh-dss rsync: connection
unexpectedly

What that means is that you are having to specify explicitly an old,
less secure, cipher in order to connect to 192.168.1.164 because that
machine doesn't (or isn't configured to) support the newer, more
secure, ciphers that your ssh client wants to use.
As Richard Kettlewell has said, that suggests strongly that you need
to update your server to a version that uses more secure ciphers,
rather than trying to force the client to use obsolete ones.
What OS is 192.168.1.164 running? It sounds as though it must be pretty old.

It certainly is old:
Ubuntu 8.04 !!!
The PC it is on came with Windows Millennium installed. That is now long
gone, thank goodness.

It is firstly a Zoneminder PC, but with much spare memory capacity.
Every time I tried to update it to a newer version it borked the ZM in
some way or other, so I left it with the system that works. It doesn't
connect to the Internet, so doesn't worry about lack of updates.
It is used for the laptop's nightly back-up with rsync.
But I get the same problem when I try to rsync from the laptop to my
newish desktop, running Ubuntu 22.04 installed from the same USB stick
as this laptop's was.
Is this a confirmation that I should (try to) update to OpenSSH on all
connected machines?
When I had Ubuntu 18.04 on the laptop, rsync worked fine with both
those PCs.

The original purpose of the new desktop was to have a modern up-to-date
machine for a new Zoneminder setup, but I could neither get the
different hardware to work, nor the software, so I abandoned that idea
after wasting enough time. The desktop is now my backup working PC
for if the laptop fails (!), and is also another of the laptop's
nightly backup destinations.
Thanks for the help.

[Richard Kettlewell]

Post by Davey

Post by Daniel James
What that means is that you are having to specify explicitly an old,
less secure, cipher in order to connect to 192.168.1.164 because that
machine doesn't (or isn't configured to) support the newer, more
secure, ciphers that your ssh client wants to use.

(In this case, the issue is a signature algorithm rather than a cipher;
and more specifically the hash function used by that algorithm.)

Post by Davey
Is this a confirmation that I should (try to) update to OpenSSH on all
connected machines?

I’ve no idea about your other machines. Good general advice for anything
connected to a network would be to use operating systems that still get
updates, and keep them fully updated. IMO for most people the right way
to keep things fully update is to enable automatic updates.

[Davey]

On Sun, 23 Feb 2025 17:06:03 +0000

Post by Richard Kettlewell

Post by Davey

Post by Daniel James
What that means is that you are having to specify explicitly an
old, less secure, cipher in order to connect to 192.168.1.164
because that machine doesn't (or isn't configured to) support the
newer, more secure, ciphers that your ssh client wants to use.

(In this case, the issue is a signature algorithm rather than a
cipher; and more specifically the hash function used by that
algorithm.)

Post by Davey
Is this a confirmation that I should (try to) update to OpenSSH on
all connected machines?

I’ve no idea about your other machines. Good general advice for
anything connected to a network would be to use operating systems
that still get updates, and keep them fully updated. IMO for most
people the right way to keep things fully update is to enable
automatic updates.

While I would agree with that in principle, as I said, the reason I did
not upgrade to a new version was that I could not get ZM and my
hardware to work with them. And it was not a problem until I installed
Ubuntu 22.04 instead of 18.04 on my laptop.

[Daniel James]

Post by Davey
While I would agree with that in principle, as I said, the reason I did
not upgrade to a new version was that I could not get ZM and my
hardware to work with them. And it was not a problem until I installed
Ubuntu 22.04 instead of 18.04 on my laptop.

Ubuntu 22.04 is nearly three years old ... one might have hoped that
you'd have upgraded before now (though I would agree that there are good
reasons not to be *too* early an adopter).

What was the problem with ZM? Was it particular hardware? I have no
practical experience with ZM (yet) but have been looking at setting
something up to monitor a few IP cameras and it's been on my radar. I'm
interested to know what you think of it?

8.04 was Hardy Heron. That was the first Ubuntu version I used, and was
probably the distro that persuaded me to ditch Windows for good. Are you
running 32-bit or 64-bit?

[Davey]

On Sun, 23 Feb 2025 19:40:52 +0000

Post by Daniel James

Post by Davey
While I would agree with that in principle, as I said, the reason I
did not upgrade to a new version was that I could not get ZM and my
hardware to work with them. And it was not a problem until I
installed Ubuntu 22.04 instead of 18.04 on my laptop.

Ubuntu 22.04 is nearly three years old ... one might have hoped that
you'd have upgraded before now (though I would agree that there are
good reasons not to be *too* early an adopter).
What was the problem with ZM? Was it particular hardware? I have no
practical experience with ZM (yet) but have been looking at setting
something up to monitor a few IP cameras and it's been on my radar.
I'm interested to know what you think of it?
8.04 was Hardy Heron. That was the first Ubuntu version I used, and
was probably the distro that persuaded me to ditch Windows for good.
Are you running 32-bit or 64-bit?

I briefly looked at 24.04, and I could not find some applications that I
am used to. Don't ask me to list them, I have forgotten what they were.
My ZM installation on the 8.04 was done with a card bought from the
now-dead Satcure, but used a fairly standard (bt878?) chip. It had a
PCI connector, as this was the choice on the motherboard of the PC.
There was a small line of code to add to a configuration file, and it
all worked. Again, I cannot remember what the problems were trying to
get it to work with later distributions, but it didn't, so there was no
problem staying with ver. 8.04. It still runs now. I don't intend to
remove it, as it works.

When I got the desktop PC, I could not use the PCI card, as it only has
PCIe slots. I tried an adapter card, but that was a total failure, the
BIOS had a stroke, from which it slowly self-recovered. I then bought a
second-hand PCIe card, but it was built for use in a professional
industrial setup, and despite much help from the manufacturer/software
supplier, the hardware and software combination would not work in my
setup. I gave it up as a bad job, as I was making no progress with it.

As for Zoneminder, the version in the 8.04 PC works well. Very
occasionally, the MySQL database needs a kick up the backside, but
that's usually after a power cut. The ZM version that came with 22.04
has so many bells and whistles that it doesn't appear to know what it's
doing. Also, I could not configure it to link to the camera inputs on
the working 8.04 PC, even though it linked to an IP camera without
problem. Luckily, ZM Console runs in the 22.04's browser, so I can
still watch what the cameras are seeing using that route.
Somebody much more attuned to this stuff might well have the knowledge
to get the PCIe card and software working, and the later ZM working, but
I am not that person.
Looking at my 8.04 download file, it appears to be 32-bit, there is no
mention of amd64 in the title. Were 64-bit versions and PCs common back
then? The PC was bought in 2000. Remember the fear of the Millennium
Bug?

[Daniel James]

Post by Davey
I briefly looked at 24.04, and I could not find some applications that I
am used to. Don't ask me to list them, I have forgotten what they were.
My ZM installation on the 8.04 was done with a card bought from the
now-dead Satcure, but used a fairly standard (bt878?) chip.

OK ... most of the contemporary stuff I read about ZM is talking about
IP cameras, but you clearly have cameras that have their own interface
cards. A very different kettle of marine life.

Post by Davey
It had a PCI connector, as this was the choice on the motherboard of
the PC. There was a small line of code to add to a configuration
file, and it all worked. Again, I cannot remember what the problems
were trying to get it to work with later distributions, but it
didn't, so there was no problem staying with ver. 8.04. It still
runs now. I don't intend to remove it, as it works.

"It works" is a great justification for using old software ...
especially when there is an investment in old hardware that may not be
supported by newer software.

Post by Davey
Looking at my 8.04 download file, it appears to be 32-bit, there is no
mention of amd64 in the title. Were 64-bit versions and PCs common back
then? The PC was bought in 2000.

2000 is around the time that AMD started supporting 64-bit mode in
Athlon and Operton CPUs, while Intel were still banging the Itanium
drum. PC's were mostly 32-bit only, back then.

By 2008, when Ubuntu Hardy came out, it was quite common for PCs to
support 64-bit operation (sometimes not well). Hardy was certainly
available in 32-bit and 64-bit versions. The client with whom I was
working at the time gave us all dual-Xeon Dell towers to use, running
64-bit Vista. Vista ran OK on 8 cores and in 8GB, and Hardy fairly
screamed on that hardware in a VM.

[Davey]

On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 16:52:09 +0000

Subject: Re: Help needed after upgrade Reply Take two.
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2025 16:52:09 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Newsgroups: uk.comp.os.linux
Organisation: Daniel James

Post by Davey
I briefly looked at 24.04, and I could not find some applications
that I am used to. Don't ask me to list them, I have forgotten what
they were. My ZM installation on the 8.04 was done with a card
bought from the now-dead Satcure, but used a fairly standard
(bt878?) chip.

OK ... most of the contemporary stuff I read about ZM is talking
about IP cameras, but you clearly have cameras that have their own
interface cards. A very different kettle of marine life.

Post by Davey
It had a PCI connector, as this was the choice on the motherboard of
the PC. There was a small line of code to add to a configuration
file, and it all worked. Again, I cannot remember what the problems
were trying to get it to work with later distributions, but it
didn't, so there was no problem staying with ver. 8.04. It still
runs now. I don't intend to remove it, as it works.

"It works" is a great justification for using old software ...
especially when there is an investment in old hardware that may not
be supported by newer software.

Post by Davey
Looking at my 8.04 download file, it appears to be 32-bit, there is
no mention of amd64 in the title. Were 64-bit versions and PCs
common back then? The PC was bought in 2000.

2000 is around the time that AMD started supporting 64-bit mode in
Athlon and Operton CPUs, while Intel were still banging the Itanium
drum. PC's were mostly 32-bit only, back then.

snip

The PC was in fact a Pentium 3. When it arrived from Dell, neither of
the slot cards worked (this was in the time when things like ethernet
cards and VGA cards were not included on the motherboard.
Dell sent me replacement cards, and when they were no different, sent
me a new motherboard. That fixed it. The original cards would probably
have worked then, but they had gone back.

[Daniel James]

Post by Richard Kettlewell
(In this case, the issue is a signature algorithm rather than a cipher;
and more specifically the hash function used by that algorithm.)

Yes, it's all about chosen-prefix attacks becoming possible on SHA-1. We
learn with hindsight that ssh-rsa might better have been called
ssh-rsa-sha1. At least ssh-rsa-sha2-256 isn't called ssh-rsa-sha256,
which would have led to a similar confusion if and when sha3 replaces sha2.

I tried to think of a better term before writing "cipher", but decided
on something that was simple, understandable, and almost right rather
than complicating the issue.

[Richard Kettlewell]

Post by Daniel James

Post by Richard Kettlewell
(In this case, the issue is a signature algorithm rather than a cipher;
and more specifically the hash function used by that algorithm.)

Yes, it's all about chosen-prefix attacks becoming possible on
SHA-1. We learn with hindsight that ssh-rsa might better have been
called ssh-rsa-sha1. At least ssh-rsa-sha2-256 isn't called
ssh-rsa-sha256, which would have led to a similar confusion if and
when sha3 replaces sha2.

It isn’t called either of those, it’s rsa-sha2-256.

AFAICT almost nobody else feels any need to refer to “SHA2-256” rather
than just SHA-256 or SHA256, despite SHA-3 having been around for nearly
a decade. I suspect the RFC8332 names are chosen for loose consistency
with the RFC5656 ECC algorithm names.

SHAKE is where it’s at if you want something from that family anyway l-)

[Daniel James]

Post by Richard Kettlewell
It isn’t called either of those, it’s rsa-sha2-256.

Of course. Sorry - my fingers were getting ahead of my brain.

Post by Richard Kettlewell
AFAICT almost nobody else feels any need to refer to “SHA2-256” rather
than just SHA-256 or SHA256, despite SHA-3 having been around for nearly
a decade.

I think it's more than "almost nobody", but it is surprisingly few. It's
almost as though people were looking for a chance to create ambiguity.

Post by Richard Kettlewell
I suspect the RFC8332 names are chosen for loose consistency
with the RFC5656 ECC algorithm names.

Could be ... though names like ssh-rsa are even earlier - from RFC4253
if not before.

It might have been better to use the (X.509, etc.) ASN.1 OID names.

Post by Richard Kettlewell
SHAKE is where it’s at if you want something from that family anyway l-)

I thought the point of SHAKE was more to do with the choice of digest
length than the overall strength of the digest? I probably need to
reread what I thought I knew ...

[Richard Kettlewell]

Post by Daniel James

Post by Richard Kettlewell
AFAICT almost nobody else feels any need to refer to “SHA2-256” rather
than just SHA-256 or SHA256, despite SHA-3 having been around for nearly
a decade.

I think it's more than "almost nobody", but it is surprisingly
few. It's almost as though people were looking for a chance to create
ambiguity.

Post by Richard Kettlewell
I suspect the RFC8332 names are chosen for loose consistency
with the RFC5656 ECC algorithm names.

Could be ... though names like ssh-rsa are even earlier - from RFC4253
if not before.

What I mean is: the ECC ones are ecdsa-sha2-nistp256 &c, for RSA it’s
rsa-sha2-256 etc. The common pattern is (algorithm)-sha2-(something),
although they’re not consistent about what the (something) is.

Post by Daniel James
It might have been better to use the (X.509, etc.) ASN.1 OID names.

That’s an option, but friendly names like nistp256 are much easier for
humans to deal with!

Post by Daniel James

Post by Richard Kettlewell
SHAKE is where it’s at if you want something from that family anyway l-)

I thought the point of SHAKE was more to do with the choice of digest
length than the overall strength of the digest? I probably need to
reread what I thought I knew ...

That’s one advantage, but there’s more: they are faster than SHA-3 for a
given security level. For example if you want 128-bit strength then
SHAKE128(M,256) is comfortably faster SHA3-256, consuming 1344 bits of
input per permutation rather than 1088. The comparison is even starker
with SHAKE256 vs SHA3-512. See RFC8692 or RFC8702 for adoption into
protocol specs.

[Davey]

On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 16:27:34 +0000

Post by Davey
As my Ubuntu 18.04 had run out of support, I decided to upgrade.
First, I could not do a straight upgrade, as the direct process was
by now unavailable . No problem, a Clean installation is the best way
anyway. I chose 22.04, as I had looked at 24.04 and couod not find
some familiar applications, so 22.04 would be a fairly seamless
process. In general, it was, but it's the final details and tweaks
that confound and take time, and lead to more time spent
head-scratching than time taken to do the base installation.
I have come up against some problems that I cannot fix, and I am
hoping that I can get some help here.
Problem 1. I cannot get a USB stick to auto-mount when plugged in. I
have followed lots of advice, some of it most confusing, and also my
desktop, which also runs Ubuntu 22.04, auto-mounts USB devices just
fine.
Problem 2. In Thunderbird, I cannot get my old (18.04) Local Folders
to show. Advice varies from that which depends on non-existent
options, to an apparently clear process which promises to work, but
doesn't. I have a folder which contains the Local Folders.
I had a Clawsmail problem, and a couple of LibreOffice problems, but I
managed to sort them out. These two remaining ones have me stumped,
even though the answers are probably simple.
Any help gratefully received and welcomed. Thanks in advance.
Thunderbird is ver. 115.18.0 (64-bit).

Test as earlier reply not showing up.