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

Re: Centris 650 Debian 10 SID Installation



Hi Eero,

Thanks, I will try changing the timeouts and disabling services.  If I
can disable enough things to make the system not too much slower than
with sysvinit, I may be able to keep systemd, at least on larger-memory
systems such as the Centris 650.

I do have a working hardware clock, with a new battery, in the 650.

-Stan

-----

On 6/14/19 11:01 AM, Eero Tamminen wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 6/13/19 6:12 AM, userm57@yahoo.com wrote:
> ...
>> 5) The system never reached multiuser mode; the startup sequence looped
>> on "Starting Network Time Synchronization" (see attached console log
>> "Centris_650-Debian_10.txt").?? The systemd timeout for this task was 1
>> min 30 sec, but it never succeeded within that limit (I let it try 10
>> times before forcing a reboot).?? I'll try other things, including single
>> user mode and checking whether I can increase the limit somehow, or
>> possibly disable network time synchronization temporarily.
> 
> You can use "systemctl mask <service-name>" to disable a service
> permanently (until you unmask it).
> 
> Alternatively, one can specify longer timeout:
> https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd-system.conf.html#DefaultTimeoutStartSec=
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think any service explicitly depends on that particular
> service, but if you don't have a (working) battery backed up clock,
> there are several things which won't work quite correctly, if your
> files are newer that the time in your machine.
> 
> 
> ????????- Eero
> 
> <rant>
> Systemd journalctl is broken by design.?? Although individual service
> log messages have counter, so they're always sorted correct, the log
> output *between* different logging clients are sorted based only on
> timestamps.?? Which means that one gets reliable boot service log only
> if machine has reliable, battery backed clock, otherwise you get
> output which can mix logs from multiple boots...
> </rant>
> 


Reply to: