Watchdog package installation is unclear/flawed

Bug #1582707 reported by paulv on 2016-05-17
20
This bug affects 4 people
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
Raspbian
Undecided
Unassigned
watchdog (Ubuntu)
Undecided
Unassigned

Bug Description

The watchdog package does not allow a persistent installation across a reboot using the systemV way of doing things in Jessie Lite (2016-03-18) anymore. The installation messages of the package shown on the console are confusing and do not point to solutions. The only way to get it working across a reboot now is to use rc.local or cron. That is a kludge at best, so what is the correct installation procedure now.

Trying to install watchdog the systemd way is also not working. Although the systemd service files for watchdog and wd_keepalive are installed, they do not work without changes and there are no pointers offered to lead to a proper installation.

I wrote a post on the Raspberri Pi forum that details the problems with the messages and the installation issues.

https://www.raspberrypi.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=29&t=147501&p=973710#p973710

Launchpad Janitor (janitor) wrote :

Status changed to 'Confirmed' because the bug affects multiple users.

Changed in watchdog (Ubuntu):
status: New → Confirmed
Andrew Dittes (adittes) wrote :

I ran into this issue today, and at the very least it is a documentation issue.

The only way I've found to get watchdog running on startup is to modify watchdog.service.

I found instructions on how to do this here: https://kd8twg.net/2015/10/30/raspberry-pi-enabling-watchdog-on-raspbian-jessie/

Basically you just need to add the following lines to /lib/systemd/system/watchdog.service:

[Install]
WantedBy=multi-user.target

After that, systemctl enable watchdog.service works as intended.

However, it doesn't seem right that you should modify a system file to get it to start correctly. If there is a better way to start watchdog, it should be documented somewhere. Otherwise, should I create a patch to add this change? Or would it be better to report this to Debian?

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  Edit
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers