Zimbra 10.1.13 Released - Please Post Your Patch/Upgrade Results Here

[yeak]

Apparently, the use of LD_LIBRARY_PATH was unset in .bashrc of the user zimbra

Mine upgrade to 10.1.13 with unset LD_LIBRARY_PATH. No error. OS is Rocky Linux 8.10 though.

Could be related in Rocky Linux 9?

[halfgaar]

I guess this is a result too: IMPORTANT: DO NOT let system package manger update zimbra-jetty-distribution w/o 10.1.13

If one wants to do 'apt update' to install the clamav updates, you're in a bind (as FOSS user).

[jackpeter]

sorry, it's redhat 7.9... and same issue, support still working on my ticket

[BradC]

Ubuntu 22.04 this patch pulls in a couple of new peculiar base dependencies :

Code: Select all

Get:1 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main amd64 libxxhash-dev amd64 0.8.1-1 [65.3 kB]
Get:2 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy/main amd64 libzstd-dev amd64 1.4.8+dfsg-3build1 [401 kB]

root@ztest:~# apt-cache showpkg libxxhash-dev libzstd-dev | grep zimbra
  zimbra-rsync,libxxhash-dev
  zimbra-rsync,libzstd-dev

Really Zimbra (Synacor)?

Edit :

Code: Select all

Patch Security Severity: High
Deployment Risk: Medium

So again we have a high security risk patch, but this time we have a pile of unknowns along with it. Do we install it? Will it break something else? It already pulls in -dev header packages, which is ludicrous. How do we trust Synacor not to break more stuff, yet we're expected to install the patch because it has a significant security fix?

This is why we run a test deployment, to try and iron out the bugs before it gets rolled out.

[jzzr]

Yes, with every update it's always the same question.

[adrian.gibanel.btactic]

sorry, it's redhat 7.9... and same issue, support still working on my ticket

Same thing as I said. RHEL 7 is E.O.L. Not sure what support is going to reply but it's not supported.

Best case scenario is that support acknowledges your E.O.L. OS and tells whoever it's responsible to revert the RHEL7 binary package changes that I assume they have pushed recently to the repos when 10.1.13 was released.

That way other people with RHEL7 won't be finding these non-supported new packages in their RHEL7 specific repos once they try to upgrade.

[jackpeter]

OK for me problem now solved: right now i migrate to other mailserver-solution with my affected customers.... until 12 hours waiting for a reaction for support i don't have more time to let customers wait for working mailsys... unfortunatelly one license less active and one more on our "friend" o365.... sad but second time in about 1.5 years i got no usable reaction/support from zimbra. time to look for alternatives
wish you guys all the best with this update and as another one posted allready: seems you really can not trust a patch and have to install (test) it before on test-environment... good luck, i go on with migration PST's to O365...

[jackpeter]

sorry, it's redhat 7.9... and same issue, support still working on my ticket

Same thing as I said. RHEL 7 is E.O.L. Not sure what support is going to reply but it's not supported.

Best case scenario is that support acknowledges your E.O.L. OS and tells whoever it's responsible to revert the RHEL7 binary package changes that I assume they have pushed recently to the repos when 10.1.13 was released.

That way other people with RHEL7 won't be finding these non-supported new packages in their RHEL7 specific repos once they try to upgrade.

very true, can't understand why this is not so. before you was not able to load a patch on a 'unsupported' environment.. but anyway, i'm migrating that server right now to o365

[sylon]

Apparently, the use of LD_LIBRARY_PATH was unset in .bashrc of the user zimbra

Mine upgrade to 10.1.13 with unset LD_LIBRARY_PATH. No error. OS is Rocky Linux 8.10 though.

Could be related in Rocky Linux 9?

Thanks for your Feedback yeak, we will keep a eye on that, but waiting first for the reply of zimbra-support.

[adrian.gibanel.btactic]

until 12 hours waiting for a reaction for support

Did you create the ticket from the support portal and made sure to select the proper severity level?

Apparently if you send an email it gets "Severity Level 4" which it's the lowest priority.