> On 2026-01-22 14:33 CET Barry Scott <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>  
> > On 22 Jan 2026, at 12:24, [email protected] wrote:
> > 
> > Hi,
> >  
> > I have been running systemd for many years and in general find it 
> > well-behaved and easy to reason about.
> >  
> > One thing, that drives me nuts though is timer behavior. 
> >  
> > For context, this problem has persisted for years across many different 
> > systemd version (currently 257) both as systemd and user timers.
> >  
> > Today I hit the problem again even if I asked both chatgpt and claude to 
> > help ensure it will not happen. 
> >  
> > The problem is this:
> >  
> > I have a (user) service and a (user) timer, that fires that service every 
> > day at 18:30. The timer is persistent=no.
> > Yesterday, for reasons, the service should not be run, so I stopped the 
> > timer (around 15:00, if I remember correctly). 
> > Today, I want the timer to trigger the service at normal runtime (i.e. 
> > 18:30), and I start the timer here at around 13:00.
> >  
> > Both being far away from the trigger time, I expected (and the llms agreed) 
> > that it should wait til 18:30 to fire. As stated, persistent is false, I 
> > specifically check that before activating the timer.
> > And then (the problem), it immediately fired the service as I started the 
> > timer. And I won an hour's worth of cleanup :(
> >  
> > Is that expected behavior, and if so, how do I get the behaviour that I 
> > wish for?
> 
> Can you post the timer unit code please.

# /home/user/.config/systemd/user/redacted-service.timer 
[Unit]
Description=Some redacted service name

[Timer]
OnCalendar=18:30:00
Persistent=false     
 
[Install]
WantedBy=default.target

> How exactly did you stop and then start the timer?

# Service has been running for 18+ months at this time already
# Yesterday, approx 3hr before timer firing
systemctl --user stop redacted-service.timer 

# Today approx 5 hours before timer firing
systemctl --user start redacted-service.timer 



> 
> Barry
> 
> >  
> > Regards, 
> >  
> > Svenne

Reply via email to