Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Waiting for carrier blocks timeout #276

Open
holmanb opened this issue Dec 27, 2023 · 5 comments
Open

Waiting for carrier blocks timeout #276

holmanb opened this issue Dec 27, 2023 · 5 comments

Comments

@holmanb
Copy link

holmanb commented Dec 27, 2023

Problem:

--timeout isn't respected when no carrier has been acquired

I see:

# dhcpcd --nobackground --ipv4only --oneshot --waitip=4 --persistent --timeout=5 --debug wlo1
dhcpcd-10.0.5 starting
DUID 00:01:00:01:2d:1e:ed:87:b6:18:32:62:ff:1a
wlo1: executing: /lib/dhcpcd/dhcpcd-run-hooks PREINIT
wlo1: executing: /lib/dhcpcd/dhcpcd-run-hooks NOCARRIER
Dropped protocol specifier '.link' from 'wlo1.link'. Using 'wlo1' (ifindex=3).
wlo1: waiting for carrier

I would expect the timeout ideally to be respected, or at the very least document this behavior.

@rsmarples
Copy link
Member

I'm thinking about removing the timeout option as it becomes meaningless when #271 happens.

@rsmarples
Copy link
Member

@holmanb once #271 happens the --oneshot option would be removed as well, but you used it in your example. Do you have a rationale for it?

@holmanb
Copy link
Author

holmanb commented Dec 30, 2023

@rsmarples Thanks for the reply and followup.

Using --oneshot for synchronous dhcp address assignment to a single interface by other tools. For example initramfs-tools recently replaced their isc dependency with dhcpcd using --oneshot. Do you have a proposal for how one might do this that works under current and future dhcpcd plans?

@rsmarples
Copy link
Member

Ok, that's a good enough reason to keep it. I'll add that the fine man page.

@holmanb
Copy link
Author

holmanb commented Jan 2, 2024

Ok, that's a good enough reason to keep it. I'll add that the fine man page.

Thanks @rsmarples. I have more questions regarding #271, but will continue the conversation here.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants