[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#968997: fwupdmgr: "Successfully" updates BIOS firmware, no effect on reboot



Package: fwupd
Followup-For: Bug #968997
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian@rocketjump.eu

Hi again,

today I was offered an upgrade to 0.1.69, and that update ran through without
problems. So it seems as though the 0.1.68 update was faulty for some reason. If
the faulty update was rejected by the firmware, it would be at least nice to get
notified as the user. But I don't know fwupdmgr well enough to say if that's
something the running system firmware gives feedback on.

As a result I'm lowering the severity to wishlist.

Regards,
Lee

-- System Information:
Debian Release: bullseye/sid
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 5.7.0-3-amd64 (SMP w/8 CPU threads)
Kernel taint flags: TAINT_USER, TAINT_OOT_MODULE, TAINT_UNSIGNED_MODULE
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=en_US:en
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
LSM: AppArmor: enabled

Versions of packages fwupd depends on:
ii  libc6                  2.31-3
ii  libefiboot1            37-5
ii  libefivar1             37-5
ii  libelf1                0.180-1+b1
ii  libflashrom1           1.2-5
ii  libfwupd2              1.4.5-1
ii  libfwupdplugin1        1.4.5-1
ii  libglib2.0-0           2.64.4-1
ii  libgudev-1.0-0         233-1
ii  libgusb2               0.3.4-0.2
ii  libjcat1               0.1.3-2
ii  libjson-glib-1.0-0     1.4.4-2
ii  libpolkit-gobject-1-0  0.105-29
ii  libsmbios-c2           2.4.3-1
ii  libsoup2.4-1           2.70.0-1
ii  libsqlite3-0           3.33.0-1
ii  libtss2-esys0          2.4.1-1+b1
ii  libxmlb1               0.1.15-2
ii  shared-mime-info       1.15-1

Versions of packages fwupd recommends:
ii  bolt          0.9-1
pn  fwupd-signed  <none>
ii  python3       3.8.2-3

fwupd suggests no packages.

-- no debconf information


Reply to: