Thanks, yes, that did the trick.
I’ve installed it on one of my test computers. It seems to work fine. I’ve
tried a couple of things that should trigger the bug, if it’s still there.
In particular, rebooting the computer then examining the journal shows that it
does get to poll all of the
> sudo apt update
> sudo apt install build-essential devscripts
> sudo apt build-dep ntpsec
> apt source ntpsec
> cd ntpsec-1.1.3+dfsg1
> patch -p1 < ~/ntpsec_1.1.3+dfsg1-3~1.gbpdde9c0.debdiff
I missed a step here, as `apt source` applies the existing patches, so
we apparently need to apply this
Hi Richard,
I’m sorry that I was not able to try that patch for you. However, I was able
to download and (with a lot of help from Hal Murray) build the latest git
version. It worked a treat and properly handled the time lag between ntpsec
starting and dhcp finishing.
Let me know if there’s
> On Mar 19, 2019, at 10:18 AM, Richard Laager wrote:
>
> Attached is an untested debdiff. This is the upstream change refreshed
> to apply to the package. You should be able to apply it and build a
> package locally like this:
>
> sudo apt update
> sudo apt install build-essential
Thanks!
I’ll give it a try tonight…
Rick
> On Mar 19, 2019, at 10:18 AM, Richard Laager wrote:
>
> Attached is an untested debdiff. This is the upstream change refreshed
> to apply to the package. You should be able to apply it and build a
> package locally like this:
>
> sudo apt update
>
Attached is an untested debdiff. This is the upstream change refreshed
to apply to the package. You should be able to apply it and build a
package locally like this:
sudo apt update
sudo apt install build-essential devscripts
sudo apt build-dep ntpsec
apt source ntpsec
cd ntpsec-1.1.3+dfsg1
patch
> On Mar 14, 2019, at 1:04 AM, Richard Laager wrote:
>
> I forwarded your bug upstream:
> https://gitlab.com/NTPsec/ntpsec/issues/577
Hi!
I’m sorry to take so long getting back. I wanted to re-do my experiments in a
standard environment that your would be able to reproduce easily. Here
I forwarded your bug upstream:
https://gitlab.com/NTPsec/ntpsec/issues/577
Getting back to the network-online thing for a bit...
You tried adding network-online.target as a dependency of
ntpsec.service, for example, by something like this (as root)?
mkdir -p
On 3/11/19 9:50 PM, Rick Thomas wrote:
> Would unplugging/replugging the ethernet cable work for steps 2 and 4…
Sure, that'd be another option.
--
Richard
Thanks Richard, I’ll see if I can set up that experiment(s) and report back
ASAP.
Would unplugging/replugging the ethernet cable work for steps 2 and 4…
Enjoy!
Rick
> On Mar 11, 2019, at 2:53 PM, Richard Laager wrote:
>
> Can we narrow this down to a reproducer? It sounds like something like
Can we narrow this down to a reproducer? It sounds like something like
this would work:
0) Configure two different pools where you can tell the servers apart.
1) Stop ntpd.
2) Break your DNS.
3) Start ntpd. Wait a few seconds for it to try to resolve and fail.
4) Fix your DNS.
Expected
Hi Richard,
My observations follow your quote…
> On Mar 11, 2019, at 12:30 PM, Richard Laager wrote:
>
> On 3/10/19 4:11 AM, Rick Thomas wrote:
>> If ntpsec implemented the "preempt" option on "peer" directives, the
>> first "peer" would be revisited after a few minutes and all would be
>>
On 3/10/19 4:11 AM, Rick Thomas wrote:
> If ntpsec implemented the "preempt" option on "peer" directives, the
> first "peer" would be revisited after a few minutes and all would be
> well. But it doesn't. So the first "peer" is as if it never existed.
What leads you to this conclusion,
> On Mar 11, 2019, at 12:46 AM, Rick Thomas wrote:
>
> Examining the journal carefully, (specifically the lines labeled “Mar 11
> 00:23:44”,
> it looks like the [Install] stanza isn’t the right place to put the “After”
> “Wants” lines.
>
> I’ll keep looking for a more appropriate place. If
Hi Tony!
I’m not sure if I’m doing it right, but here’s what I did and what happened…
What I did:
Edited /lib/systemd/system/ntpsec-systemd-netif.path
Here’s a diff
> rbthomas@cube:~$ diff -c2 /SAVE//lib/systemd/system/ntpsec-systemd-netif.path
> /lib/systemd/system/ntpsec-systemd-netif.path
>
On Sun, Mar 10, 2019 at 01:11:46AM -0800, Rick Thomas wrote:
> Package: ntpsec
> Version: 1.1.3+dfsg1-2
> Severity: important
>
> Dear Maintainer,
>
> *** Reporter, please consider answering these questions, where appropriate ***
>
>* What led up to the situation?
> the /etc/ntpsec/ntp.conf
Package: ntpsec
Version: 1.1.3+dfsg1-2
Severity: important
Dear Maintainer,
*** Reporter, please consider answering these questions, where appropriate ***
* What led up to the situation?
the /etc/ntpsec/ntp.conf file (attached) has two "pool" directives and no
"server" directives.
So it
17 matches
Mail list logo
