I wonder if it's possible to discuss matters, in any list, without everything coming out looking like an insult and/or a put-down... :/
On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 3:17 PM, Dark Penguin <[email protected]> wrote: > Now that systemd manages the shutdown procedure, I don't know if it's >>>>> possible to achieve the same behaviour (and thus make NUT work with >>>>> systemd). >>>>> >>>> >>>> As already mentioned, it is ouside of scope of OS actually. How you did >>>> it before systemd? >>>> >>> >>> It was actually a feature of NUT - and a default and recommended feature >>> at some moment. >>> See this, from their FAQ: >>> http://networkupstools.org/docs/FAQ.html#_i_8217_m_facing_a_power_race >>> And this - https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=835634 >>> (there is a link to an old discussion about implementing this feature). >>> Now it doesn't work anymore, and I'm trying to find a new solution... >>> >> >> So you do not even bother to describe how it worked before so others may >> suggest how it can be (re-)implemented using systemd? Oh, well ... >> > > No, that's not what I meant! Instead of trying to describe it myself, I've > posted a link to their website where they describe the procedure > first-hand! Basically, there is a "shutdown script" (though I'm not exactly > sure where is it), which is apparently executed right before halting, so > you can put "sleep" and "reboot" there. I was wondering if there is a > similar thing in systemd. > > > systemd supports switching back to initramfs instead of directly halting >>>> system. This allows you to implement your logic there after everything >>>> is completely shut down and unmounted (you probably need to unmount old >>>> root manually though). You can even monitor UPS from initramfs and only >>>> reboot when it reports power is back to make it safe. >>>> >>> >>> This may be the best idea without touching the kernel. But it still >>> can't go through the "proper" halt procedure with syncing and unloading >>> the drives, correct?.. >>> >> >> I have no idea what "unloading the drives" means. >> > > That's why I've posted the second link: in that bug discussion, one person > is explaining why this is a bad idea. In general, only the kernel can do > "proper" halt, which among other things includes unloading the heads from > the hard drive so that it is ready to be powered off (and apparently > "hdparm -y" does not cut it somehow). > > > -- > darkpenguin > > _______________________________________________ > systemd-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel >
_______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
