[Bug 498439] Re: uprecords reports >100% uptime

2022-01-11 Thread Bug Watch Updater
** Changed in: uptimed (Debian) Status: Confirmed => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/498439 Title: uprecords reports >100% uptime To manage notifications about thi

[Bug 498439] Re: uprecords reports >100% uptime

2017-12-16 Thread Johan Andersson
I've also encountered this bug in current release of CentOS 7.4.1708 (3.10.0-693.11.1.el7.x86_64). I'm running uptimed on a few units as well (Ubuntu 17.10 4.13.0-16-generic & MacOSX 10.11.6 [15G17023] 15.6.0) - and I havn't had any problems with negative uptime reports from those. This problem/

[Bug 498439] Re: uprecords reports >100% uptime

2017-08-29 Thread no!chance
This bug is present in the current release of ubuntu: # Uptime | System Boot up +--- 112 days, 18:05:05 | Linux 4.4.0-92-genericWed Aug 16 15:41:17 2017

[Bug 498439] Re: uprecords reports >100% uptime

2016-12-04 Thread Bug Watch Updater
** Changed in: uptimed (Debian) Status: Unknown => Confirmed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/498439 Title: uprecords reports >100% uptime To manage notifications about this bug

[Bug 498439] Re: uprecords reports >100% uptime

2016-12-04 Thread Alan Pope 🍺🐧🐱 πŸ¦„
** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #654830 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=654830 ** Also affects: uptimed (Debian) via http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=654830 Importance: Unknown Status: Unknown -- You received this bug notification because y

[Bug 498439] Re: uprecords reports >100% uptime

2016-01-05 Thread RS
I have the same issue on a raspberry pi: pi@raspberrypi:~$ uprecords # Uptime | System Boot up +--- 1 403 days, 04:46:21 | Linux 3.12.31+Thu Nov 6

[Bug 498439] Re: uprecords reports >100% uptime

2014-05-18 Thread Pieter
I have the same problem, running on a KVM vm. Is there no easy way just to zero negative values ? Do i understand the problem correctly that by the time the server reboots, the clock has moved forward, and then during the reboot it is reset (moving back in time) and then when the server comes up

[Bug 498439] Re: uprecords reports >100% uptime

2012-07-25 Thread Launchpad Bug Tracker
Status changed to 'Confirmed' because the bug affects multiple users. ** Changed in: uptimed (Ubuntu) Status: New => Confirmed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/498439 Title: upr

[Bug 498439] Re: uprecords reports >100% uptime

2012-05-20 Thread shawnlandden
the way towards fixing this bug would involve clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW, const struct timespec *monotonictime); which is linux 2.6.28+ specific, and is not subject to change due to ntpdate and friends. see man 2 clock_gettime I'm not sure we should just replace sysinfo->uptime however,

[Bug 498439] Re: uprecords reports >100% uptime

2012-02-15 Thread scientes
whats going on here is a difference between the monotonic time reported by /proc/uptime and the hwclock which does a few of the other numbers (not sure specifics) . I think this all just means your monotonic (cpu- based) clock is running alittle fast compared to the RTC (battery- powered clock). W