Closed eliasp closed 5 years ago
@eliasp shouldn't that be in a different formula?
As it serves the same purpose as any other NTP client (and might even replace existing NTP setups on many clients in the near future) I felt like the ntp-formula would be the best place to handle this to just abstract "timekeeping" without relying on a specific implementation of it.
I can understand, but I prefer a clean relationship between formula name and what it does. Timesyncd is a different beast
see systemd-formula
Support for
systemd-timesyncd
should be implemented for client-only setups where NTP server functionality isn't required:>=216
[*]>=216
) version is installedsystemd-timesyncd
(timedatectl set-ntp 1
) [**][*] The reason for wanting
>=216
is, that since this release the whole NTP handling in systemd was streamlined. Before that, individual NTP services could provide drop-in configs which would then be used by systemd. This was quite a mess and error-prone. See also this entry from theNEWS
file:[**] Once https://github.com/saltstack/salt/issues/20392 is implemented, the whole
timedatectl
setup should be done via DBus which provides a proper interface for this instead of fiddling withcmd.run
output/results.