Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2016 09:53:22 +0200 (CEST) From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Trond_Endrest=F8l?= <Trond.Endrestol@fagskolen.gjovik.no> To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Cc: FreeBSD Stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: leapsecond file Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.20.1608080951430.43694@mail.fig.ol.no> In-Reply-To: <m2wpjs102b.wl%randy@psg.com> References: <m2wpjs102b.wl%randy@psg.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 8 Aug 2016 11:11+0900, Randy Bush wrote:
> i get these on all fbsd 10.3 hosts
>
> Aug 7 04:13:06 cache0 ntpd[576]: leapsecond file ('/var/db/ntpd.leap-seconds.list'): expired less than 68 days ago
>
> i have
>
> # grep ntp /etc/periodic.conf.local
> # 480.leapfile-ntpd
> daily_ntpd_leapfile_enable="YES"
> daily_ntpd_avoid_congestion="NO"
>
> consulting the net of a thousand lies did not bring enlightenment.
> maybe someone here has a clue bat? thanks.
I use:
daily_ntpd_leapfile_enable="YES"
daily_ntpd_avoid_congestion="YES"
You could try updating the leapsecond file manually:
service ntpd fetch
service ntpd restart
--
+-------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| Vennlig hilsen, | Best regards, |
| Trond Endrestøl, | Trond Endrestøl, |
| IT-ansvarlig, | System administrator, |
| Fagskolen Innlandet, | Gjøvik Technical College, Norway, |
| tlf. mob. 952 62 567, | Cellular...: +47 952 62 567, |
| sentralbord 61 14 54 00. | Switchboard: +47 61 14 54 00. |
+-------------------------------+------------------------------------+
From owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Mon Aug 8 08:02:05 2016
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
[IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A4ADBB2DCA
for <freebsd-stable@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
Mon, 8 Aug 2016 08:02:05 +0000 (UTC)
(envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de)
Received: from mx0.gentlemail.de (mx0.gentlemail.de [IPv6:2a00:e10:2800::a130])
(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
(Client did not present a certificate)
by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0D8951EAD
for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Mon, 8 Aug 2016 08:02:04 +0000 (UTC)
(envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de)
Received: from mh0.gentlemail.de (mh0.gentlemail.de [IPv6:2a00:e10:2800::a135])
by mx0.gentlemail.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u78821Vj064968;
Mon, 8 Aug 2016 10:02:01 +0200 (CEST)
(envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de)
Received: from titan.inop.mo1.omnilan.net (titan.inop.mo1.omnilan.net
[IPv6:2001:a60:f0bb:1::3:1])
(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by mh0.gentlemail.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 02482BF4;
Mon, 8 Aug 2016 10:02:00 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <57A83C78.1070403@omnilan.de>
Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2016 10:02:00 +0200
From: Harry Schmalzbauer <freebsd@omnilan.de>
Organization: OmniLAN
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; de-DE;
rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100906 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca>
CC: FreeBSD Stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
Subject: unionfs bugs, a partial patch and some comments [Was: Re: 1-BETA3
Panic: __lockmgr_args: downgrade a recursed lockmgr nfs @
/usr/local/share/deploy-tools/RELENG_11/src/sys/fs/unionfs/union_vnops.c:1905]
References: <57A79E24.8000100@omnilan.de>
<YQBPR01MB0401201977AEA8A803F27B23DD1A0@YQBPR01MB0401.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
In-Reply-To: <YQBPR01MB0401201977AEA8A803F27B23DD1A0@YQBPR01MB0401.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7
(mx0.gentlemail.de [IPv6:2a00:e10:2800::a130]);
Mon, 08 Aug 2016 10:02:01 +0200 (CEST)
X-Milter: Spamilter (Reciever: mx0.gentlemail.de; Sender-ip: ;
Sender-helo: mh0.gentlemail.de; )
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-stable>,
<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/>;
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2016 08:02:05 -0000
Bezüglich Rick Macklem's Nachricht vom 07.08.2016 23:34 (localtime):
> Harry Schmalzbauer wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I had another crash which I'm quite sure was triggered by mount_unionfs:
> Just in case you are not already aware, unionfs is always broken. Read
> the BUGS
> section at the end of "man mount_unionfs". If it were easy to fix,
> someone would
> have done so long ago. Yes, some use it successfully, but if not...
>
> Sorry, but I suspect that is how it will remain, rick
Thanks for the hint, not happy to hear that, but I was not aware of that
explicit warning in man 8 mount_unionfs :-(
This feature is utterly important for me (all my productive machines
have "/" read-only mounted and "/etc" is an union to a writable, synch
mounted separate fs), so back in 2012, after a lot of locking redesign
has been done in 9-current, I got Attilio Raos attention and he gave out
some test patches for 9.0.
He was aware of missing locking adjustments, but patches addressing the
majority of them didn't work.
Since then I'm draging a minimal patch which prevents at least the
kernel panics for me.
Unfortunately I don't have the skills to continue Attilio Raos work.
Just for anybody else needing unionfs:
https://people.freebsd.org/~attilio/unionfs_missing_insmntque_lock.patch
This patch still applies and I'm successfully using this (unmodified) up
to FreeBSD-10.3 and never had any panic in all these years.
I will continue using it for FreeBSD-11 and I guess it will also prevent
my last reported panics.
But I wanted to take part in the BETA test without local modifications
at first.
Another very importend usage scenario of unionfs for me is for my build
host(s). I'm (nfs4-)sharing a svn-checked out read-only portstree. My
inofficial "ports/inofficial" directory perfectly shows up by
unionfs-mounting it below the unaltered portstree :-)
For me, unionfs is as important as ZFS (and nullfs) is in FreeBSD.
First thing to do for me, after I won in lottery, was to find someone
who can be sponsored fixing unionfs ;-) And bringing MNAMELEN into 21st
century state, matching ZFS needs:
https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2015-November/048640.html
This is another patch I'm carrying for a very long time which solves
tremendous limitations for me. Without that, I couldn't use ZFS
snapshots in real world, along with a human-friendly dataset naming :-)
-Harry
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.20.1608080951430.43694>