It’s literally in the 2nd sentence of this thread. Maybe read before posting?
2 Likes
Ah sorry, you’re right…
2 Likes
on second thoughts, if you are as impatient as i was to check wassup with LO, you can take it off arch. beware this is only intended for LO package which “i think” is fairly isolated enough to supplant from arch without other dependencies wrecking it. any such practices on other packages can put your system in a “partial upgrade” situation. you are forewarned.
to get LO off arch;
sudo pacman -U https://archlinux.org/packages/extra/x86_64/libreoffice-fresh/download/
Yes, it is a manual task. Depending what packages are included in the sync, we may need to update or rebuild some of our overlays and/or our own packages.
Sorry, missed your question earlier.
1 Like
Due to this even unstable branch is still affected by the last glibc vulnerability CVE-2023-6246 (Local Privilege Escalation, from any unprivileged user to full root):
https://www.qualys.com/2024/01/30/cve-2023-6246/syslog.txt
I’ve rolled out Arch’s fixed packages 2.38-8 on my systems last week (2024-02-02) but they’ve moved on to 2.39-1 since.
Manjaro is is still affected across all branches with version 2.38-7.
edit:
24-01-30: Coordinated Release Date (18:00 UTC).
4 Likes
When this surfaced however long ago, I tried and could repeat its findings for anyone who wants to know. 
+1. from what i remember moving to 2.38-8 only required *gcc-libs* rebuilt package in my case. however moving to 2.39-1 effectively requires rebuilt packages of everything from kernels on it, so stopped short f it.
We are in an unstable channel so I guess it can be mentioned.
While Manjaro is behind, and Arch is extra steps ahead, you can make use of downgrade to grab 2.38-8 from the ALA. ( this is mostly acceptable due to the minor version, and recognizing that Manjaro ships the Arch package [Packager : Frederik Schwan <freswa@archlinux.org>] )
sudo downgrade glibc lib32-glibc
EDIT.
Well then theres today
:: Starting full system upgrade...
resolving dependencies...
looking for conflicting packages...
Packages (2) glibc-2.38-8.1 lib32-glibc-2.38-8.1
Total Download Size: 18.21 MiB
Total Installed Size: 65.33 MiB
Net Upgrade Size: 0.06 MiB
eyy 
4 Likes
tsunami of updates, incoming!!! 
5 Likes
This shall be mentioned here https://forum.manjaro.org/t/core-dump-in-polaris-with-rocm-opencl-version-6-0
Hi Everybody,
Is it normal that I can’t find linux68-nvidia in the unstable repo?
Wish You well
I guess some extra modules are not build for RC kernels in general.
See:
1 Like
Kernel 6.8 hasn’t even been released yet so yes, I’d say it’s quite normal to not find something that can’t exist yet.
it is not uncommon for release candidate kernels to be missing kernel modules
To check for when kernel modules are available - packages.manjaro.org/?query=linux68
1 Like
That’s weird because I already installed an RC kernel and I was able to boot my system. Without NVIDIA drivers it’s impossible.
Wish You well
Ran a sync yesterday - and noted that pacman was updated - a bunch of Archlinux patches applied
source=(https://sources.archlinux.org/other/pacman/$pkgname-$pkgver.tar.xz{,.sig}
pacman-always-create-directories-from-debugedit.patch::https://gitlab.archlinux.org/pacman/pacman/-/commit/efd0c24c07b86be014a4edb5a8ece021b87e3900.patch
pacman-always-create-directories-from-debugedit-fixup.patch::https://gitlab.archlinux.org/pacman/pacman/-/commit/86981383a2f4380bda26311831be94cdc743649b.patch
pacman-fix-unique-source-paths.patch::https://gitlab.archlinux.org/pacman/pacman/-/commit/478af273dfe24ded197ec54ae977ddc3719d74a0.patch
pacman-strip-include-o-files-similar-to-kernel-modules.patch::https://gitlab.archlinux.org/pacman/pacman/-/commit/de11824527ec4e2561e161ac40a5714ec943543c.patch
pacman-fix-compatibility-with-bash-5.2-patsub_replacement.patch::https://gitlab.archlinux.org/pacman/pacman/-/commit/0e938f188692c710be36f9dd9ea7b94381aed1b4.patch
pacman-fix-order-of-fakechroot-fakeroot-nesting.patch::https://gitlab.archlinux.org/pacman/pacman/-/commit/05f283b5ad8f5b8f995076e93a27c8772076f872.patch
pacman-change-default-checksum-from-md5-to-sha256.patch::https://gitlab.archlinux.org/pacman/pacman/-/commit/aa3a1bc3b50d797fb75278f79a83cd7dde50c66e.patch
pacman-sort-debuginfod-repro.patch::https://gitlab.archlinux.org/pacman/pacman/-/commit/843bf21e794c79c5b3bcf8a57e45ef9c62312fee.patch
pacman-split-off-strip-debug.patch::https://gitlab.archlinux.org/pacman/pacman/-/commit/7a4fff3310ba2eadd3d5428cbb92e58eb2ee853b.patch
pacman-ignore-a-files.patch::https://gitlab.archlinux.org/pacman/pacman/-/commit/00d2b1f90261bf77eaaf262d2504af016562f2ac.patch
pacman-early-err-git.patch::https://gitlab.archlinux.org/pacman/pacman/-/commit/3aa096a74f717d31650e0eb3cf34e9a5ebadc313.patch
pacman-fix-gnupg-binary-data.patch::https://gitlab.archlinux.org/pacman/pacman/-/commit/86ec26b2d33372a4b3bda48f22c4a9f226c3ccce.patch
pacman-fix-gnupg-newsig-check.patch::https://gitlab.archlinux.org/pacman/pacman/-/commit/16a064701a30d7e1175e1185cc6da44238302fab.patch
pacman-check-pipes-gnupg.patch::https://gitlab.archlinux.org/pacman/pacman/-/commit/f8c2e59ec57c86827b1f1b1c2f6760dc3e59fe40.patch
pacman.conf
makepkg.conf
pacman-sync-first-option.patch)
This sync removed my pacman keyring.
I noticed only this morning as I was installing python-opengl and my sublimetext repo threw key errors.
It turned out the entire pacman keyring was missing - the error message is keyring not writeable doh - it was gone.
pacman-key init
followed by
pacman-key --populate ...
What went wrong ?
@cscs that was really nuclear - but necessary - what did she say? nuke it from orbit is the only way to be sure …
I think this patch is part of the reason
Maybe it was the same thing that bit me shortly before?
I haven’t figured it out yet.
That patch only changed the default checksum from md5 to sha256 in the proto files: