Hi Robie, On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 07:37:12AM +0100, Robie Basak wrote: >Package: fake-hwclock >Version: 0.5 > >I've observed a system with a correctly working fake-hwclock (originally >initalised by NTP) set its time back to shortly after the epoch, >including in /etc/fake-hwclock.data. > >I believe this happened because "fake-hwclock save" was called after >boot before "fake-hwclock load" was called. > >I think this happens in the case of a very early shutdown event that >calls "/etc/init.d/rc 0" before "/etc/init.d/rcS" has completed. > >In my case, I have a Raspberry Pi rigged with an external shutdown >signal hooked up via udev. If the signal is "high" at boot time, then >the Pi shuts down without fully booting up. > >I'm not entirely sure that this is the cause, but the race is there. > >Can we have "fake-hwclock save" have the same protection as >"fake-hwclock load"? That is, do not write a time that causes >/etc/fake-hwclock.data to go backwards, unless forced.
Sure, no problem. v0.8 coming shortly with this added. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. [email protected] "I suspect most samba developers are already technically insane... Of course, since many of them are Australians, you can't tell." -- Linus Torvalds -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
