Unable to upgrade from 20.04.2 to 20.04.3

Asked by Vivek

I posted this question on askubuntu too https://askubuntu.com/questions/1367090/unable-to-upgrade-from-20-04-2-to-20-04-3, and one of the users suggested that I can possibly file a bug. But before I do that, I wanted to see if I can get any more inputs here.

Basically I got a Dell XPS laptop recently with Ubuntu pre-installed in it. After my initial login, the GUI did ask me to update software packages, which I did. I didn't pay attention to what was getting updated. But at the end of it, I noticed that my system has the following Ubuntu and Kernel releases.

lsb_release -a
--------------------

No LSB modules are available.
Distributor ID: Ubuntu
Description: Ubuntu 20.04.2 LTS (fossa-bulbasaur X55.1)
Release: 20.04
Codename: focal

uname -a
--------------
Linux dev-linux 5.10.0-1045-oem #47-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 18 10:41:03 UTC 2021 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

Since 20.04.3 was released end of August 2021, I was hoping I would get to that release automatically through regular updates. Since that didn't happen, I manually did 'apt-get update' followed by apt-get upgrade (even tried dist-upgrade), but still no effect. The GUI updater also thinks my software is up-to-date.

One thing which I noticed recently is that my laptop has 5.10 OEM kernel in it (possibly shipped that way by the manufacturer itself). Is this why I am unable to come to 20.04.3 yet?

If so, is this expected behavior and at some point in the future will I be able to move to 20.04.3 via regular software updates?

If this is not an expected behavior, I can potentially file a bug with more details in it.

*******

Meanwhile, I am posting all the command output which I had posted on askubuntu here again, for anyone's reference:

sudo apt-get update
------------------------------
Hit:1 http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb stable InRelease
Hit:2 https://repo.nordvpn.com/deb/nordvpn/debian stable InRelease
Hit:3 https://updates.signal.org/desktop/apt xenial InRelease
Hit:4 http://packages.microsoft.com/repos/code stable InRelease
Hit:5 http://archive.canonical.com/ubuntu focal InRelease
Hit:6 https://repo.skype.com/deb stable InRelease
Get:7 http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal-security InRelease [114 kB]
Hit:8 http://ppa.launchpad.net/teejee2008/timeshift/ubuntu focal InRelease
Hit:9 http://oem.archive.canonical.com focal InRelease
Hit:10 http://dell.archive.canonical.com focal InRelease
Hit:11 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal InRelease
Get:12 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal-updates InRelease [114 kB]
Hit:13 https://packages.teejeetech.com/aptik/0/OTKti8icDT/ubuntu/focal/amd64 stable InRelease
Hit:14 https://packages.teejeetech.com/battery-monitor/free/ubuntu/focal/amd64 stable InRelease
Get:15 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal-backports InRelease [101 kB]
Get:16 http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal-security/main amd64 DEP-11 Metadata [29.0 kB]
Get:17 http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal-security/universe amd64 DEP-11 Metadata [62.5 kB]
Get:18 http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal-security/multiverse amd64 DEP-11 Metadata [2,464 B]
Get:19 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal-updates/main amd64 Packages [1,256 kB]
Get:20 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal-updates/main i386 Packages [544 kB]
Get:21 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal-updates/main amd64 DEP-11 Metadata [283 kB]
Get:22 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal-updates/universe i386 Packages [641 kB]
Get:23 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal-updates/universe amd64 Packages [864 kB]
Get:24 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal-updates/universe amd64 DEP-11 Metadata [361 kB]
Get:25 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal-updates/universe DEP-11 48x48 Icons [220 kB]
Get:26 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal-updates/multiverse amd64 DEP-11 Metadata [944 B]
Get:27 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal-backports/universe amd64 DEP-11 Metadata [10.4 kB]
Fetched 4,603 kB in 3s (1,316 kB/s)
Reading package lists... Done

sudo apt-get upgrade
--------------------------------
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Calculating upgrade... Done
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.

sudo apt list --upgradable
---------------------------------------
Listing... Done

Question information

Language:
English Edit question
Status:
Answered
For:
Ubuntu Edit question
Assignee:
No assignee Edit question
Last query:
Last reply:
Revision history for this message
Manfred Hampl (m-hampl) said (last edit ):
#1

What is the output of the command

apt-cache policy base-files

Revision history for this message
actionparsnip (andrew-woodhead666) said :
#2

Try:

sudo apt-get dist-upgrade

Revision history for this message
Vivek (linuxmonk21) said :
#3

@actionparsnip

I already tried dist-upgrade. Even that didn't help.

@Manfred, this is the output of apt-cache policy base-files

base-files:
  Installed: 11ubuntu5.4
  Candidate: 11ubuntu5.4
  Version table:
 *** 11ubuntu5.4 500
        500 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal-updates/main amd64 Packages
        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
     11ubuntu5 500
        500 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal/main amd64 Packages

I suspect this behavior has something to do with my OEM Linux Kernel used. Even today I got an update notification from the GUI installer which upgraded my kernel from 5.10.0-1045-oem to 5.10.0-1049-oem. But Ubuntu release itself is untouched and stays at 20.04.2.

Do OEM kernels get a slower upgrade of point releases compared to stock Ubuntu kernel?

Revision history for this message
Manfred Hampl (m-hampl) said :
#4

The version number that is displayed comes from the package base-files and has nothing to do with the kernel type and version

What is the output of

ls -l /etc/issue /etc/issue.net /etc/lsb-release /etc/os-release
cat /etc/issue /etc/issue.net /etc/lsb-release /etc/os-release

These files should have a date of 2021-08-04 14:53 UTC (or later) and show 20.04.3 in their text
If they don't, then run a reinstallation of the package

sudo apt install --reinstall base-files

and then try again.

Revision history for this message
Vivek (linuxmonk21) said :
#5

@Manfred, thank you for pointing me in the right direction.

It seems that only /usr/lib/os-release has an incorrect timestamp as well as contents in it. It still has 20.04.2. Whereas every other file seem to have 20.04.3 in it. One other thing to note is, I also have another file named /usr/lib/os-release.oem-release which seem to have the right value.

I didn't try apt-install --reinstall base-files yet. But do you think there is a bug somewhere, which is causing the os-release file to be not updated? Just wondering how I could have landed into this state.

$ ls -l /usr/lib/os-release
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 406 Oct 1 20:31 /usr/lib/os-release

$ cat /usr/lib/os-release
NAME="Ubuntu"
VERSION="20.04.2 LTS (Focal Fossa)"
ID=ubuntu
ID_LIKE=debian
PRETTY_NAME="Ubuntu 20.04.2 LTS (fossa-bulbasaur X55.1)"
VERSION_ID="20.04"
HOME_URL="https://www.ubuntu.com/"
SUPPORT_URL="https://help.ubuntu.com/"
BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/"
PRIVACY_POLICY_URL="https://www.ubuntu.com/legal/terms-and-policies/privacy-policy"
VERSION_CODENAME=focal
UBUNTU_CODENAME=focal

$ ls -l /usr/lib/os-release.oem-release
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 382 Aug 4 07:53 /usr/lib/os-release.oem-release

$ cat /usr/lib/os-release.oem-release
NAME="Ubuntu"
VERSION="20.04.3 LTS (Focal Fossa)"
ID=ubuntu
ID_LIKE=debian
PRETTY_NAME="Ubuntu 20.04.3 LTS"
VERSION_ID="20.04"
HOME_URL="https://www.ubuntu.com/"
SUPPORT_URL="https://help.ubuntu.com/"
BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/"
PRIVACY_POLICY_URL="https://www.ubuntu.com/legal/terms-and-policies/privacy-policy"
VERSION_CODENAME=focal
UBUNTU_CODENAME=focal

$ ls -l /etc/issue
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 26 Aug 4 07:53 /etc/issue

$ cat /etc/issue
Ubuntu 20.04.3 LTS \n \l

$ ls -l /etc/issue.net
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 19 Aug 4 07:53 /etc/issue.net

cat /etc/issue.net
Ubuntu 20.04.3 LTS

$ ls -l /etc/lsb-release
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 104 Aug 4 07:53 /etc/lsb-release

$ cat /etc/lsb-release
DISTRIB_ID=Ubuntu
DISTRIB_RELEASE=20.04
DISTRIB_CODENAME=focal
DISTRIB_DESCRIPTION="Ubuntu 20.04.3 LTS"

Revision history for this message
Manfred Hampl (m-hampl) said :
#6

Ok, it seems that for some unknown reason the file /usr/lib/os-release is still the previous version and everything else has been updated.

I suggest that you try the reinstall. Let's see whether this works or shows errors.

Revision history for this message
Vivek (linuxmonk21) said :
#7

Even after sudo apt install --reinstall base-files, the issue still remains.

$ sudo apt install --reinstall base-files
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 1 reinstalled, 0 to remove and 4 not upgraded.
Need to get 60.6 kB of archives.
After this operation, 0 B of additional disk space will be used.
Get:1 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal-updates/main amd64 base-files amd64 11ubuntu5.4 [60.6 kB]
Fetched 60.6 kB in 1s (55.7 kB/s)
(Reading database ... 191154 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to unpack .../base-files_11ubuntu5.4_amd64.deb ...
Warning: Stopping motd-news.service, but it can still be activated by:
  motd-news.timer
Unpacking base-files (11ubuntu5.4) over (11ubuntu5.4) ...
Setting up base-files (11ubuntu5.4) ...
motd-news.service is a disabled or a static unit, not starting it.
Processing triggers for cracklib-runtime (2.9.6-3.2) ...
Processing triggers for plymouth-theme-ubuntu-text (0.9.4git20200323-0ubuntu6.2) ...
update-initramfs: deferring update (trigger activated)
Processing triggers for install-info (6.7.0.dfsg.2-5) ...
Processing triggers for man-db (2.9.1-1) ...
Processing triggers for initramfs-tools (0.136ubuntu6.6) ...
update-initramfs: Generating /boot/initrd.img-5.10.0-1049-oem
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/i915/tgl_huc_7.5.0.bin for module i915
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/i915/tgl_huc_7.5.0.bin for module i915
I: The initramfs will attempt to resume from /dev/dm-2
I: (/dev/mapper/vgubuntu-swap_1)
I: Set the RESUME variable to override this.

Revision history for this message
Manfred Hampl (m-hampl) said (last edit ):
#8

Even after reinstalling the file /usr/lib/os-release is still the old version?
That is unexpected.

Is there anything useful in the log files?

tail /var/log/apt/term.log
tail /var/log/dpkg.log

Are there any special attributes set on the file preventing modification?

lsattr /usr/lib/os-release*

Eventually you can try deleting the file and then doing the reinstall.

Revision history for this message
Vivek (linuxmonk21) said :
#9

I don't see any special attribute set on this file, compared to other files which are fine.

Also nothing odd in the /var/log/apt/history.log or /var/log/dpkg.log

$ lsattr /usr/lib/os-release*
--------------e----- /usr/lib/os-release
--------------e----- /usr/lib/os-release.oem-release

$ ls -l /usr/lib/os-release*
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 406 Oct 1 20:31 /usr/lib/os-release
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 382 Aug 4 07:53 /usr/lib/os-release.oem-release

$ lsattr /etc/issue.net
--------------e----- /etc/issue.net

$ ls -l /etc/issue.net
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 19 Aug 4 07:53 /etc/issue.net

$ ls -l /etc/os-release
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 21 Aug 4 07:53 /etc/os-release -> ../usr/lib/os-release

Tried removing the file and re-installing. Ran into some other error due to that:

sudo apt install --reinstall base-files
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 1 reinstalled, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 60.6 kB of archives.
After this operation, 0 B of additional disk space will be used.
Get:1 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal-updates/main amd64 base-files amd64 11ubuntu5.4 [60.6 kB]
Fetched 60.6 kB in 1s (111 kB/s)
(Reading database ... 191276 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to unpack .../base-files_11ubuntu5.4_amd64.deb ...
Warning: Stopping motd-news.service, but it can still be activated by:
  motd-news.timer
Unpacking base-files (11ubuntu5.4) over (11ubuntu5.4) ...
Setting up base-files (11ubuntu5.4) ...
motd-news.service is a disabled or a static unit, not starting it.
Processing triggers for cracklib-runtime (2.9.6-3.2) ...
Processing triggers for plymouth-theme-ubuntu-text (0.9.4git20200323-0ubuntu6.2) ...
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/bin/lsb_release", line 95, in <module>
    main()
  File "/usr/bin/lsb_release", line 59, in main
    distinfo = lsb_release.get_distro_information()
  File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/lsb_release.py", line 398, in get_distro_information
    distinfo = guess_debian_release()
  File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/lsb_release.py", line 288, in guess_debian_release
    get_distro_info(distinfo['ID'])
  File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/lsb_release.py", line 48, in get_distro_info
    RELEASES_ORDER.sort(key=lambda n: float(n[0]))
  File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/lsb_release.py", line 48, in <lambda>
    RELEASES_ORDER.sort(key=lambda n: float(n[0]))
ValueError: could not convert string to float: '6.06 LTS'
update-initramfs: deferring update (trigger activated)
Processing triggers for install-info (6.7.0.dfsg.2-5) ...
Processing triggers for man-db (2.9.1-1) ...
Processing triggers for initramfs-tools (0.136ubuntu6.6) ...
update-initramfs: Generating /boot/initrd.img-5.10.0-1049-oem
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/i915/tgl_huc_7.5.0.bin for module i915
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/i915/tgl_huc_7.5.0.bin for module i915
I: The initramfs will attempt to resume from /dev/dm-2
I: (/dev/mapper/vgubuntu-swap_1)
I: Set the RESUME variable to override this.

Revision history for this message
actionparsnip (andrew-woodhead666) said :
#10

sudo apt-get install firmware-linux

Should clear up the missing firmware warning

Revision history for this message
Manfred Hampl (m-hampl) said :
#11

The firmware message is just a warning, and installing linux-firmware (not firmware-linux) will not help, because the tgl_huc_7.5.0.bin file is not contained in that package for focal (was added only for groovy).
If you really want to get rid of that warning, you can extract that file from the linux-firmware package for groovy or later and copy it into the right directory.

What is now the status of /usr/lib/os-release?
Does that file exist? What release number does it show?

Revision history for this message
Vivek (linuxmonk21) said :
#12

After deleting the /usr/lib/os-release and doing reinstall of base files, it never got recreated again. Instead I got the below stack trace which I posted earlier. I even got some pop-ups asking me to report this problem to Ubuntu. Which I did.

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/bin/lsb_release", line 95, in <module>
    main()
  File "/usr/bin/lsb_release", line 59, in main
    distinfo = lsb_release.get_distro_information()
  File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/lsb_release.py", line 398, in get_distro_information
    distinfo = guess_debian_release()
  File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/lsb_release.py", line 288, in guess_debian_release
    get_distro_info(distinfo['ID'])
  File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/lsb_release.py", line 48, in get_distro_info
    RELEASES_ORDER.sort(key=lambda n: float(n[0]))
  File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/lsb_release.py", line 48, in <lambda>
    RELEASES_ORDER.sort(key=lambda n: float(n[0]))
ValueError: could not convert string to float: '6.06 LTS'

The /etc/os-release which was a symbolic link to /usr/lib/os-release, it was in broken state after the reinstall command. So I had to bring back the deleted os-release file from a backup location for now. So the system is still in its old state.

Also I have two os-release files here. Not sure if this is normal. May be with OEM installations, os-release.oem-release should be used as a source of truth by base-files package?

$ ls -l /usr/lib/os-release*
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 406 Oct 1 20:31 /usr/lib/os-release
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 382 Aug 4 07:53 /usr/lib/os-release.oem-release

Revision history for this message
Vivek (linuxmonk21) said :
#13

I even tried deleting both /usr/lib/os-release and symbolic link /etc/os-release and did a reinstall. But the os-release file never gets generated and I still see the same backtrace in the command output.

Revision history for this message
Manfred Hampl (m-hampl) said :
#14

I am at my wits' end.
I have no idea why the /usr/lib/os-release file is not correctly updated.

You should consider creating a bug report.

I can understand the python crash, because apparently the system expects the file to be there, and if is deleted, then a python script fails.

Some ideas for further diagnostics (although probably not really helpful:

dpkg-query --search /usr/lib/os-release
sudo updatedb; locate os-release

Revision history for this message
Vivek (linuxmonk21) said :
#15

@Manfred. Thank you.

Created the following bug:

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/base-files/+bug/1946343

Can you help with this problem?

Provide an answer of your own, or ask Vivek for more information if necessary.

To post a message you must log in.