Hi,

You can safely ignore that warning. It doesn't prevent KC patches from being applied. We'll fix this issue in one of the following KC agent releases in order to avoid disturbing our customers.

Thank you for the reply.

I guess I'm just getting a little concerned because kcarectl --info on the server without libcare shows:

kpatch-for: Linux version 2.6.32-954.3.5.lve1.4.78.el6.x86_64

Whereas on the server that has libcare , kcarectl --info shows:

kpatch-for: Linux version 2.6.32-954.3.5.lve1.4.80.el6.x86_64

I'm not sure why the version number seems to be a bit behind on one server. Is this also something will resolve itself soon?

Thank you.

Hi,

In all cases, please make sure you are running the latest version of the KC agent: https://docs.kernelcare.com/installation/#update

If the issue is still there, get in touch with our support at https://cloudlinux.zendesk.com

Thank you for the reply Alexandre.

I still don't know why one server has libcare installed and the other one appears not to.

The other strange thing is, even though they're basically identical in all ways, the slightly different results between the two servers when run the following commands and I'll highlight some differences in bold below.

Server 1:

[~]# yum install -y kernelcare
Loaded plugins: fastestmirror, rhnplugin, universal-hooks
Setting up Install Process
Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile
* EA4: 66.23.237.210
* cpanel-addons-production-feed: 66.23.237.210
* cpanel-plugins: 66.23.237.210
* cloudlinux-x86_64-server-6: xmlrpc.cln.cloudlinux.com
Package kernelcare-2.40-1.el6.x86_64 already installed and latest version
Nothing to do

Server 2:

[~]# yum install -y kernelcare
Loaded plugins: fastestmirror, rhnplugin, security, tsflags, universal-hooks
Setting up Install Process
Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile
* EA4: 66.23.237.210
* cpanel-addons-production-feed: 66.23.237.210
* cpanel-plugins: 66.23.237.210
* cloudlinux-x86_64-server-6: xmlrpc.cln.cloudlinux.com
Package kernelcare-2.40-1.el6.x86_64 already installed and latest version
Nothing to do

Notice that Server 2 has security and tsflags in the "Loaded plugins" line, but Server 1 does not?

Server 1:

kcarectl --info
kpatch-state: patch is applied
kpatch-for: Linux version 2.6.32-954.3.5.lve1.4.78.el6.x86_64 ([email protected]) (gcc version 4.4.7 20120313 (Red Hat 4.4.7-23) (GCC) ) #1 SMP Thu Mar 26 08:20:27 EDT 2020
kpatch-build-time: Tue Feb 2 13:47:15 2021
kpatch-description: 8-:1612516085;2.6.32-954.3.5.lve1.4.80.el6

Server 2:

[~]# kcarectl --info
kpatch-state: patch is applied
kpatch-for: Linux version 2.6.32-954.3.5.lve1.4.80.el6.x86_64 ([email protected]) (gcc version 4.4.7 20120313 (Red Hat 4.4.7-23) (GCC) ) #1 SMP Thu Sep 24 01:42:00 EDT 2020
kpatch-build-time: Tue Feb 2 13:47:12 2021
kpatch-description: 3-:1612516384;2.6.32-954.3.5.lve1.4.80.el6

Notice that Server 2 has a 78 in the "kpatch-for" line, but Server 1 has 80?


And yet both servers show an identical result for kcarectl --uname as below:

Server 1:

[~]# kcarectl --uname
2.6.32-954.3.5.lve1.4.80.el6

Server 2:

[~]# kcarectl --uname
2.6.32-954.3.5.lve1.4.80.el6

So yes, even though I intend to submit a ticket on the helpdesk, I'm hoping to try to narrow-down a little more here so that I can avoid creating a ticket that causes any confusion.

Do you think I should submit one ticket regarding my question as to why libcare is not installed (and if I need it) on Server 1 and also include in that ticket the differences from Server 2 on it that I pointed out (regarding the "Loaded plugins" line and "kpatch-for" , or do you think I should create two separate tickets?

Thanks again for your reply and advice, I really appreciate it.

Hi,

Notice that Server 2 has a 78 in the "kpatch-for" line, but Server 1 has 80?

This is because they've booted with a different kernel version, the first one with ...lve1.4.78 and the second one with ...lve1.4.80

And yet both servers show an identical result for kcarectl --uname

This is because both are patched to the same level.

Libcare is not required unless you are running KernelCare+ (as opposed to KernelCare)