[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: unbound and fetchmail (was: Re: Remove route '169.254.0.0/16 dev ovs-system')



Am Fri, Mar 03, 2023 at 10:09:42PM +0700 schrieb Max Nikulin:
> On 02/03/2023 22:27, Christoph Brinkhaus wrote:
> > Am Thu, Mar 02, 2023 at 09:26:33PM +0700 schrieb Max Nikulin:
> > > On 28/02/2023 17:25, Christoph Brinkhaus wrote:
> > > > I will just inform about the status. Everything is fine now. A word
> > > > about systemd-networkd-wait-online: With this service running there
> > > > has been even a delay of 1-2 seconds when switching from one console
> > > > to a different one (the consoles when X is not running). I have no
> > > > idea about that side effect.
> > > Does it happen each time or it is getty startup time? In the latter case you
> > > may try (for various console numbers)
> > > 
> > >      systemd-analyze critical-chaingetty@tty1.service
> > > 
> > It is happening each time when changing the console.

I just remember that systemd-networkd-wait-online has been introduced
just by the unbound fix as proposed in
https://github.com/NLnetLabs/unbound/issues/773.
I do now know about any systemd service which make use of that.
But the certainly is at least one.

> I have no idea which way it may be related to network configuration in
> general and to 169.254.x.y link local addresses in particular. It is better
> to start a new thread.
> 
> - Does journalctl -f show some messages during such delay?
> - Do you mean that each of [Ctrl+Alt+F3], [Ctrl+Alt+F4], [Ctrl+Alt+F3] hit
> in sequence cause delay?

Here it is [Alt+F1], [ALT+F2]. CTRL is just required when coming from
a X11 screen. But even without X11 this delay happened without any
indication in the log files.

> - Policy Kit may need to adjust permissions to some devices (video, audio,
> etc.), but 2 seconds is unreasonably long delay.

I agree, especially when the trigger as switching the console is
totally unrelated.

Kind regards,
Christoph
-- 
Ist die Katze gesund
schmeckt sie dem Hund.


Reply to: