On Sun, 26 Jul 2020 23:43:53 +0200 Michael Biebl wrote: > Am 26.07.20 um 23:20 schrieb Francesco Poli: [...] > > If this is confirmed, then maybe the bug is exactly that the Persistent > > directive does not apply to sleeping time (only to down time). > > I don't consider that a bug. Persistent is only documented as affecting > a powered down system.
But there must be a way to set a timer that does *not* catch up with missed runs, during both downtime and sleep time! If there isn't, then I would call this a missing feature. And I would say that this can be reported upstream as a feature request. If, on the other hand, there indeed is a way, please tell me how I can modify the timer. Is there a way to cause the timer to automatically become inactive, immediately before the system goes to sleep, and then to automatically be re-activated, immediately after the system is woken up? If I interpret the documentation correctly, this would prevent a Persistent=false timer to catch up with missed runs during sleep time. And it would cause a OnActiveSec=5min timer to trigger 5 min after the wake-up (+ the randomized delay). Is this possible? Speaking about the randomized delay, shouldn't it be applied to catch-ups too, when Persistent=true? Or at least, you seem to have written so, when talking about [anacron.timer]... [anacron.timer]: <https://salsa.debian.org/debian/anacron/-/commit/fdf6f9ec46bda512c061616b18c9ed7031682331> Could you please clarify? I may be misinterpreting what you wrote. Thanks for your time and patience. -- http://www.inventati.org/frx/ There's not a second to spare! To the laboratory! ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82 3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE
pgp2ST_SXZMIy.pgp
Description: PGP signature
