Err:1 https://openhab.jfrog.io/openhab/openhab-linuxpkg testing/main armhf openhab2 all 2.5.3-1
Unknown date format Bad header data [IP: 35.231.52.82 443]
Err:2 https://openhab.jfrog.io/openhab/openhab-linuxpkg testing/main armhf openhab2-addons all 2.5.3-1
Unknown date format Bad header data [IP: 35.231.52.82 443]
E: Failed to fetch https://openhab.jfrog.io/openhab/openhab-linuxpkg/pool/main/2.5.3/openhab2_2.5.3-1_all.deb Unknown date format Bad header data [IP: 35.231.52.82 443]
E: Failed to fetch https://openhab.jfrog.io/openhab/openhab-linuxpkg/pool/main/2.5.3/openhab2-addons_2.5.3-1_all.deb Unknown date format Bad header data [IP: 35.231.52.82 443]
Testing issues are for developers testing integration. All testing issues need to be reported on GitHub so they can be resolved, not here.
All production systems should be using the stable versions.
And which Github Repo is the correct one to report a screwed up Release file/Webserver config? That file isnât part of any repo so a report in any of the repos is âofftopicâ.
@Kai Could you please check what happened with the apt repository and why apt is complaining about an unknown date format? I assume this is because the Last-Modified Header is sent as CET while the RFC says it MUST always be specified as GMT (see RFC2616 Section 3.3.1, âAll HTTP date/time stamps MUST be represented in Greenwich Mean Time (GMT), without exception.â).
The only parts updated in 2.5 are Addons, not core. I assume you are not trying 3.0 testing.
I just know reporting Testing release issues is unhelpful because the developers do not look here for testing issues and many developers do not even use this forum. They mainly communicate through Issues & pull requests. Anybody running testing releases is expected to know that. I do not run testing releases.
You are confusing releases and repositories there. A release file is not a release but a file that lists files in a repository. This file needs to be updated whenever something in the repo is changed (doesnât matter if its core, addon or something entirely new thatâs added) and of course the headers should be correct so that apt downloads it (which it doesnât at this point).
This can also be done with the stable (and unstable) dir of the repository as its an issue with the Webserver/itâs configuration, it doesnât really matter what it delivers.
The posting from 9 days ago specifically showed the Testing repository which is off-topic for this stable patch release thread. I was not the one that confused repositories.
@tnemrap posted off-topic and I was trying to redirect nicely instead of reporting the post. I guess that was my error but people usually do not like their posts reported to the moderators.
You donât seem to realize that the issue is for all repoâs because, as I already said, the Webserver is returning headers it shouldnât. It doesnt matter what you request, if itâs testing, stable, unstable or whatever. Of course we can report it here for stable, in another thread for a milestone (testing) release, and on github for unstable but reporting the same issue 3 times is kinda stupid.
Also testing and stable are equal now since there are no new milestone releases (you even mentioned that in another Thread so I really donât get why you are complaining here now), so it doesnât matter at the moment which repo is used, the content is the same. Just unstable is different now (for obvious reasons). So testing users are currently using the exact same version that stable users are using, but thatâs irrelevant for this issue.
I already spend too much of my time searching for lazy users. I know nothing about Java or jfrog.io and have no motivation to learn about it.
Thank you for pointing toe right direction though. If they had reported that as an OH issue they would likely have found the same conclusion. That is the proper process for any suspected Testing release issues.
It is a very impressive list of updates for a single month and I guess this is partially due to everyone being at home and having more time to code - the positive side effects of Corona.
A major driver of having all those PRs merged is another reason though: We have welcomed @cpmeister as a new add-ons maintainer a few weeks back and he did an unbelievable job in reviewing PRs that were already in the queue for a long time. He deserves a huge THANK YOU and I hope for all of us that heâll continue this way the next months as well !
Many thanks as well to all contributors and other members of our community - please stay safe and healthy everyone!
Thanks to all, but indeed particularly to @cpmeister for his tremendous support.
For the Xiaomi miio binding is one of the biggest changes it has seen in one release. It wouldnât been possible without his help!
Cloud support (experimental), easy tokens
Vacuum map
Conditional execution of command to support dimmers
Multiple actions linked to one channel
Support for more complex action command
Improve brightness channels for most yeelights and Phillips lights
Miot devices support, as this will be the next gen protocol many devices can be added soon
Many small improvement to improve general stability and connection issues
Hi
2.5.4 is not available on openhabian at the moment.
Iâve done:
sudo apt-get update
and
sudo apt-get upgrade -s
No new version found:
Paketlisten werden gelesen⊠Fertig
AbhÀngigkeitsbaum wird aufgebaut.
Statusinformationen werden eingelesen⊠Fertig
Paketaktualisierung (Upgrade) wird berechnet⊠Fertig
Das folgende Paket wurde automatisch installiert und wird nicht mehr benötigt:
triggerhappy
Verwenden Sie »sudo apt autoremove«, um es zu entfernen.
Die folgenden Pakete sind zurĂŒckgehalten worden:
nodejs
0 aktualisiert, 0 neu installiert, 0 zu entfernen und 1 nicht aktualisiert.
Great work @Kai, and yes, thanks @cpmeister to give its time to help us fix, merge and also progress in coding. May I thank COVID also ? Not sure, but it gave a breath to OH !
!