Re: Superblock last write time is in the future.

Le 04/07/2017 à 22:17, Felix Miata a écrit : Pascal Hambourg composed on 2017-07-04 21:28 (UTC+0200): Felix Miata composed: Pascal Hambourg composed on 2017-07-03 21:06 (UTC+0200): Setting the RTC with local time does not work with dual boot because when daylight saving time comes, both

Re: Superblock last write time is in the future.

Pascal Hambourg composed on 2017-07-04 21:28 (UTC+0200): > Felix Miata composed: >> Pascal Hambourg composed on 2017-07-03 21:06 (UTC+0200): >>> Setting the RTC with local time does not work with dual boot because >>> when daylight saving time comes, both systems will do the shift, >>>

Re: Superblock last write time is in the future.

Le 03/07/2017 à 23:37, Felix Miata a écrit : Pascal Hambourg composed on 2017-07-03 21:06 (UTC+0200): Setting the RTC with local time does not work with dual boot because when daylight saving time comes, both systems will do the shift, resulting in a 2 hour shift unless some time

Re: Superblock last write time is in the future.

On Mon 03 Jul 2017 at 17:05:51 (-0300), Wellington Terumi Uemura wrote: > On 03-07-2017 16:42, David Wright wrote: > >The discussion is not about units, but about reference points.¹ > The discussion also is not about reference points, I disagree. The RTC is a reference point for setting the

Re: Superblock last write time is in the future.

Pascal Hambourg composed on 2017-07-03 21:06 (UTC+0200): > Wellington Terumi Uemura composed: >> I use Linux since Slackware 2.0, way before Windows 95. And up to Debian >> 8, I've never, EVER, had to follow that procedure because it worked just >> fine before. > Really ? > Setting the RTC with

Re: Superblock last write time is in the future.

Le quintidi 15 messidor, an CCXXV, Wellington Terumi Uemura a écrit : > I have no idea why they are forcing the use o UTC, local time was doing just > fine. My TV doesn't use UTC, my router (OpenWRT) doesn't use UTC, my phone > (Samsung S7 Edge) doesn't use UTC, it doesn't even has settings for

Re: Superblock last write time is in the future.

On 03-07-2017 16:42, David Wright wrote: The discussion is not about units, but about reference points.¹ The discussion also is not about reference points, but what is right to do. I don't need UTC, many people around the world doesn't neither, leave UTC for those who need it. True; before

Re: Superblock last write time is in the future.

We already know that information, Pascal. That is not the issue. On 03-07-2017 16:06, Pascal Hambourg wrote: Le 02/07/2017 à 23:08, Wellington Terumi Uemura a écrit : I use Linux since Slackware 2.0, way before Windows 95. And up to Debian 8, I've never, EVER, had to follow that procedure

Re: Superblock last write time is in the future.

On Mon 03 Jul 2017 at 13:00:24 (-0300), Wellington Terumi Uemura wrote: > I could say the same for for US not using a metric system, you don't change > this by force even if it is right. The discussion is not about units, but about reference points.¹ > I don't need UTC, many people around the

Re: Superblock last write time is in the future.

Le 02/07/2017 à 23:08, Wellington Terumi Uemura a écrit : I use Linux since Slackware 2.0, way before Windows 95. And up to Debian 8, I've never, EVER, had to follow that procedure because it worked just fine before. Really ? Setting the RTC with local time does not work with dual boot because

Re: Superblock last write time is in the future.

On Monday 03 July 2017 11:02:56 David Wright wrote: > On Mon 03 Jul 2017 at 09:38:12 (+0200), to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 02, 2017 at 06:08:31PM -0300, Wellington Terumi Uemura wrote: > > > I use Linux since Slackware 2.0, way before Windows 95. And up to > > > Debian 8, I've never,

Re: Superblock last write time is in the future.

I could say the same for for US not using a metric system, you don't change this by force even if it is right. I don't need UTC, many people around the world doesn't neither, leave UTC for those who need it. We can avoid a lot of mess with that. Em 3 de jul de 2017 12:03, "David Wright"

Re: Superblock last write time is in the future.

On Mon 03 Jul 2017 at 09:28:36 (-0400), Cindy-Sue Causey wrote: > On 7/3/17, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 08:25:58AM -0300, Wellington Terumi Uemura wrote: > >> Looks like people can't make up their

Re: Superblock last write time is in the future.

On Mon 03 Jul 2017 at 09:38:12 (+0200), to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > On Sun, Jul 02, 2017 at 06:08:31PM -0300, Wellington Terumi Uemura wrote: > > I use Linux since Slackware 2.0, way before Windows 95. And up to > > Debian 8, I've never, EVER, had to follow that procedure because it > > worked just

Re: Superblock last write time is in the future.

On 7/3/17, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 08:25:58AM -0300, Wellington Terumi Uemura wrote: >> Looks like people can't make up their minds, /etc/adjtime is missing >> from initramfs. >> >> root@Dragon:/boot#

Re: Superblock last write time is in the future.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 08:25:58AM -0300, Wellington Terumi Uemura wrote: > Looks like people can't make up their minds, /etc/adjtime is missing > from initramfs. > > root@Dragon:/boot# lsinitramfs /boot/initrd.img-4.9.0-3-amd64|grep etc > etc >

Re: Superblock last write time is in the future.

Looks like people can't make up their minds, /etc/adjtime is missing from initramfs. root@Dragon:/boot# lsinitramfs /boot/initrd.img-4.9.0-3-amd64|grep etc etc etc/ld.so.cache etc/mtab etc/ld.so.conf.d etc/ld.so.conf.d/zz_i386-biarch-compat.conf etc/ld.so.conf.d/libc.conf

Re: Superblock last write time is in the future.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, Jul 02, 2017 at 06:08:31PM -0300, Wellington Terumi Uemura wrote: > I use Linux since Slackware 2.0, way before Windows 95. And up to > Debian 8, I've never, EVER, had to follow that procedure because it > worked just fine before. I'm using

Re: Superblock last write time is in the future.

I use Linux since Slackware 2.0, way before Windows 95. And up to Debian 8, I've never, EVER, had to follow that procedure because it worked just fine before. I'm using Debian like what, 10 years now. Why do I have to change a registry because something in Debian 9 is not syncing the time

Re: Superblock last write time is in the future.

Wellington Terumi Uemura: > Michael Biebl: > > I would set the system clock from LOCAL to UTC (see /etc/adjtime) > > Just to give a feedback, this doesn't work if you have a second OS > like Windows. Did you follow this procedure? https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Time#UTC_in_Windows "One

Re: Superblock last write time is in the future.

Debian, since 8. Was doing just fine, all this mess started with 9. Em 2 de jul de 2017 14:25, "Michael Biebl" escreveu: > Am 02.07.2017 um 17:49 schrieb Wellington Terumi Uemura: > > Just to give a feedback, this doesn't work if you have a second OS like > > Windows. > >

Re: Superblock last write time is in the future.

Am 02.07.2017 um 17:49 schrieb Wellington Terumi Uemura: > Just to give a feedback, this doesn't work if you have a second OS like > Windows. Windows (since 7) works fine with UTC. There is a registry key you can set. -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the

Re: Superblock last write time is in the future.

Just to give a feedback, this doesn't work if you have a second OS like Windows. I've returned to LOCAL and installed a NTP client to make sure the clock is right, this still a BUG. On 21-06-2017 06:50, Michael Biebl wrote: Am 21.06.2017 um 07:43 schrieb Wellington Terumi Uemura: RTC in

Re: Superblock last write time is in the future.

Am 21.06.2017 um 07:43 schrieb Wellington Terumi Uemura: > RTC in local TZ: yes > > The bugreport show that this has been patched, anything else I could do > to stop running system check/clean every time I boot? I would set the system clock from LOCAL to UTC (see /etc/adjtime) -- Why is it

Superblock last write time is in the future.

Since a fresh install from Debian 8 to 9, this started to happen. Looking in to the matter, I've found this so far. https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=755722 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=767040 Looking over the net people with other Linux had the same issue,

RE: superblock last write time is in the future

, Fred. -Message d'origine- De : MERLIN Philippe [mailto:phil-deb1.mer...@laposte.net] Envoyé : vendredi 10 avril 2015 19:19 À : debian-user-french@lists.debian.org Objet : superblock last write time is in the future Bonjour, Depuis quelques jours au démarrage d'un ordinateur

Re: [Résolu] superblock last write time is in the future

version système Debian testing i386, j'ai le message suivant : Superblock last write time is in the future (by less than a day, probably due to the hardware clock being incorrectly set) FIXED et analyse par fsck du disque root durée :15 minutes J'ai cherché sur google et on a souvent

Re: [Résolu] superblock last write time is in the future

On Saturday 11 April 2015 16:42:20 MERLIN Philippe wrote: Merci à tous c'était bien ça. J'ai installé comme suggéré les deux paquets et j'ai aussi lancé comme un autre message me le conseillait : hwclock --systohc --utc et maintenant je n'ai plus ce message. Par contre je ne m'explique pas

Re: superblock last write time is in the future on boot

The problem is that the newest version of e2fsprogs fixed some problems which revealed new ones. It has to do with the fact that the local time is set after the disk is mounted. So if you clock is not on UT, you are in trouble. Thre possibilities to fix: 1. downgrade e2fsprogs (and e2fslibs) 2.

Re: superblock last write time is in the future on boot

On Fri, 6 Jan 2006 19:20:52 -0200 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: date -u will tell you what the system thinks is the UTC time. If the output is different from plain date, then it certainly thinks it is in some timezone. I'm also running testing. I've noted that 'date'

Re: superblock last write time is in the future on boot

On Sat, 07 Jan 2006, David E. Fox wrote: 'date -u' is correct (UTC), dates are set coorectly in the filesystem for instance but the log entries are in UTC. That doesn't match the behavior in sarge. It doesn't match the behaviour in my sid system either (where it logs in local time). It is

Re: superblock last write time is in the future on boot

Is using UTC the last word for this problem? I must dual-boot with windows on my machine. My linux configuration is relatively simple with everything on a single partition. Time zone is set properly, is not a symbolic link and is in the same filesystem as root. I've noticed that when I have

Re: superblock last write time is in the future on boot

On Fri, 06 Jan 2006, Ray Lanza wrote: Is using UTC the last word for this problem? I must dual-boot with windows on my machine. No, of course not. It is the _easiest_ fix. It is becoming aparent that we can do a much better fix in glibc, but I need to investigate more. And there is always

Re: superblock last write time is in the future on boot

Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: On Fri, 06 Jan 2006, Ray Lanza wrote: Is using UTC the last word for this problem? I must dual-boot with windows on my machine. No, of course not. It is the _easiest_ fix. It is becoming aparent that we can do a much better fix in glibc, but I

Re: superblock last write time is in the future on boot

On Fri, 06 Jan 2006, Kent West wrote: [ root fsck problem caused by time skew ] It seems like I had this on a newly-installed Sid box the other day. After I installed ntpdate the problem went away (but I was fighting several problems at once, so no guarantees that this had any relevance). I

Re: superblock last write time is in the future on boot

On Wed, 04 Jan 2006, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: I submitted a bug against e2fsprogs a couple weeks ago due to similar issues on boot up. the developer got right on it and apparently fixed it. Something to do with when debian sets the system clock as it relates to the fsck portion of boot.

Re: superblock last write time is in the future on boot

On Wed, 04 Jan 2006, Lei Kong wrote: hardware clock store UTC time (UTF=yes in /etc/default/rcS). Now, my question is, any drawback in doing so? besides possbile windows problem on a dual boot machine and confusion when looking at bios. None whatsoever, other than now your system is that

Re: superblock last write time is in the future on boot

On Thu, 5 Jan 2006 08:59:24 -0200 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 04 Jan 2006, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: I submitted a bug against e2fsprogs a couple weeks ago due to similar issues on boot up. the developer got right on it and apparently fixed it. Something

Re: Re: superblock last write time is in the future on boot

On Tue, 03 Jan 2006, Brandon Simmons wrote: boot. According to the Debian changelog for the e2fsprogs package, the newest version checks for this, so I don't know whether e2fsprogs is mistaken or whether there really is a problem. How would I go about checking this? Short and to the

Re: superblock last write time is in the future on boot

On Wed, 04 Jan 2006, Lei Kong wrote: On Tue, 03 Jan 2006, Brandon Simmons wrote: boot. According to the Debian changelog for the e2fsprogs package, the newest version checks for this, so I don't know whether e2fsprogs is mistaken or whether there really is a problem. How would I go

Re: superblock last write time is in the future on boot

On Wed, 4 Jan 2006 22:28:15 -0200 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 04 Jan 2006, Lei Kong wrote: On Tue, 03 Jan 2006, Brandon Simmons wrote: boot. According to the Debian changelog for the e2fsprogs package, the newest version checks for this, so I

Re: Re: superblock last write time is in the future on boot

On Tue, 03 Jan 2006, Brandon Simmons wrote: boot. According to the Debian changelog for the e2fsprogs package, the newest version checks for this, so I don't know whether e2fsprogs is mistaken or whether there really is a problem. How would I go about checking this?

superblock last write time is in the future on boot

Hello, After upgrading my system to 'testing', on bootup I am getting the error above after checking root filesystem...; it then forces a reboot and fsck on the next boot. According to the Debian changelog for the e2fsprogs package, the newest version checks for this, so I don't know whether

Re: superblock last write time is in the future on boot

On Tue, 03 Jan 2006, Brandon Simmons wrote: boot. According to the Debian changelog for the e2fsprogs package, the newest version checks for this, so I don't know whether e2fsprogs is mistaken or whether there really is a problem. How would I go about checking this? Short and to the point:

Re: superblock last write time is in the future on boot

Brandon Simmons [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: After upgrading my system to 'testing', on bootup I am getting the error above after checking root filesystem...; it then forces a reboot and fsck on the next boot. FWIW I found the error went away once I ran 'fsck -y' (more specifically, when I set