Am Sun, 29 Mar 2015 16:49:21 -0600 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés <[email protected]>:
> On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 4:32 PM, Marc Joliet <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Am Sun, 29 Mar 2015 12:48:18 -0600 > > schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés <[email protected]>: > > > > [...] > > > Are you really sure "0/2:00" means "every 2 hours"? I don't see an > explicit > > > mention in man 7 systemd.time that 0 means "*-*-* 00:00:00". It really > > > worked bi-hourly before? > > > > Yes, it definitely worked before (I've been running this and other timers > for > > about a month). I don't remember how I inferred that rule, but I think it > was > > this bit from systemd.time(7): > > > > "Either time or date specification may be omitted, in which case the > > current day and 00:00:00 is implied, respectively. If the second > component > > is not specified, ":00" is assumed." > > > > But I don't see any definition for these components, so maybe I'm wrong > and my > > timer only works by accident. > > > > > Either way, it cretainly could be a bug. > > > > Perhaps, since it's back to the way it was before: > > > > # systemctl list-timers > > NEXT LEFT LAST > PASSED UNIT ACTIVATES > > Mo 2015-03-30 02:00:00 CEST 1h 44min left Mo 2015-03-30 00:00:00 > CEST 15min ago backup-hourly.timer > [email protected] > > [...] > > Perhaps the bug is only in how systemctl presents the information. If I understand you correctly, then no: [email protected] did not run in spite of the contradictory next run time. The only times it ran were when I manually started it intermittently. I suppose I'll have to file a bug report. At the very least I'll find out if this was a systemd bug or not. Greetings -- Marc Joliet -- "People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we don't" - Bjarne Stroustrup
pgp0KI5QEnPRb.pgp
Description: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP
