similar to: NUT driver update process...

I have the latest version of the Windows port of NUT installed on my Windows?7?machine. The UPS is connected via serial cable to the Windows machine. I also have my Synology NAS (which uses NUT) connected over the local network as a slave to the Windows NUT master. The Synology slave is configured to immediately go into "safe mode" whenever an FSD or OB+LB indication is received from the

On Fri, 14 Aug 2020, Todd Benivegna wrote: > https://forum.synology.com/enu/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=73960&hilit=ups+slave  > > I have the latest version of the Windows port of NUT (A UPS management package) installed on my Windows 7 machine. The UPS I am using is a > very old APC BK650M which is controlled and sends its status via a special serial cable to the Windows

Hello, I'm experiencing a strange early shutdown behavior with the following system: * */OS/*: Slackware Linux 14.2 x86_64 * */NUT/*: 2.7.4 (from my own package <https://sotirov-bg.net/slackpack/pack.cgi?id=4083>) * */UPS/*: MGE Ellipse PRO 1600 <powerquality.eaton.com/Products-services/Backup-Power-UPS/Ellipse-PRO.aspx> (bought in September 2017) */Problem

hi: my testing server has two power supply and attach to two ups. one of the ups is connect to the server with usb. my upsmon.conf like below: # for two ups MONITOR ftups at localhost 1 monmaster nutmaster master MONITOR ftups at 10.1.1.2 1 monslave nutslave slave MINSUPPLIES 1 # for early shutdown NOTIFYFLAG ONBATT EXEC+WALL+SYSLOG NOTIFYFLAG ONLINE EXEC+WALL+SYSLOG NOTIFYCMD

2012/2/28 Arnaud Quette <aquette.dev at gmail.com>: > Hi Charles > > 2012/2/28 Charles Lepple <clepple at gmail.com>: >> On Feb 28, 2012, at 3:44 AM, Arnaud Quette wrote: >> >>> Hi Billy, >>> >>> switching back this thread to -upsdev >>> >>> 2012/2/27 William R. Elliot <bill at wreassoc.com>: >>>> I

On 1/25/20 10:53 AM, Georgi D. Sotirov wrote: > OK, so yesterday evening I done a real test cutting of the power to > the UPS. And it went good... the UPS supported my server for 28:50 > minutes (i.e. the expected runtime with this load), before forcing > shutdown. The batteries could still hold as charge was 30 % with about > 15 minutes run time. And the UPS did hold for

Thanks Larry, no problem. I appreciate the input. Whenever you get a chance I’d really like to compare notes with someone who has NUT and a Synology to see why the heck mine doesn’t work! ;). I’m also using my Pi as the master like you. Thanks. Todd -- Todd Benivegna // todd at benivegna.com On Aug 14, 2020, 11:55 AM -0400, Larry Fahnoe <fahnoe at fahnoetech.com>, wrote: > On Fri, Aug

On January 24, 2020 6:13:31 PM GMT+02:00, "Georgi D. Sotirov" <gdsotirov at gmail.com> wrote: >OK, my UPS turned out to be older that I thought. I apparently bought >and installed it in September 2016 (not 2017 as I initially wrote). >That >makes for over 3 years of work, which is over the life expectancy of >the >batteries, Good batteries can last 4-5 years.

Hello, I am a new user of NUT and trying to wrap my ahead around a couple of things. I installed NUT 2.7.4-13 from package on RasPi 4, running Raspbian Linux 11 (bullseye). I have Cyberpower SL700U connected to it. For testing I set battery.charge.low to 90, so I wouldn't have to wait a long time. See all relevant config below. First of all, what seems to happen is that UPS gets to the low

Hello, The UPS I am developing a driver to is able to report several flags for critical hardware conditions, like overheat, overload, inverter failure, output short etc. What should be the correct policy of operation when such a condition occurs? I think that the an UPS in such a condition is not reliable and therefore a system shutdown should be called. However, the developer's manual and

FYI: PR https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/pull/1328 adds handling of `PRIMARY` alias to `MASTER` on protocol side, hopefully completing the puzzle for issue #840. Reviews and testing would be welcome :) On Sun, Mar 14, 2021, 00:34 Jim Klimov <jimklimov+nut at gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks again for all the suggestions. > > For now I've prepared draft PRs, mostly to map out

FYI: PR https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/pull/1328 adds handling of `PRIMARY` alias to `MASTER` on protocol side, hopefully completing the puzzle for issue #840. Reviews and testing would be welcome :) On Sun, Mar 14, 2021, 00:34 Jim Klimov <jimklimov+nut at gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks again for all the suggestions. > > For now I've prepared draft PRs, mostly to map out

Hi, recently I observed that during a power outage, my NUT setup doesn't shutdown properly. Indeed it never reaches the LowBattery state to notify and initiate shutdown on clients. Reviewing my setup and logs I think I'm facing multiple problems and I'm unable to point to real root cause. First, let me focus on my scenario and current setup: In normal status (ONLINE, fully charged)

On Sat, Jun 27, 2020, at 23:11, Manuel Wolfshant wrote: > On 6/28/20 5:54 AM, Scott Colby wrote: >> >> I'm not convinced this is the problem; I think that pfSense has an alternative way of running the NUT components: # ps aux | grep ups root 45456 0.0 0.1 6796 884 - Is 02:22 0:00.01 /usr/local/sbin/upsmon uucp 45751 0.0 0.1 6796 772 - S 02:22

First of all, please forgive me is this question has already been covered in these mailing lists; the "Search mailing list" link is dead, and I've only read the most recent monthly archives. I often have a situation where, for one of many possible reasons, the UPS always thinks that its battery is critical. And I'm even fine with a situation when it's an emergency

Thanks again for all the suggestions. For now I've prepared draft PRs, mostly to map out where the changes are needed - based on my earlier work with the originally proposed terminology. Now that we know where to change it, should not be too great a hassle to replace again by some other choice... subordinate was a bit too long to type :) To make the election of team choice more simple, I

Thanks again for all the suggestions. For now I've prepared draft PRs, mostly to map out where the changes are needed - based on my earlier work with the originally proposed terminology. Now that we know where to change it, should not be too great a hassle to replace again by some other choice... subordinate was a bit too long to type :) To make the election of team choice more simple, I

I've googled and RTFM'ed, but still can't solve this one. I hope you folks can. This affects my entire computer cluster, but let's start simple: I've got a computer running NUT; OS is Scientific Linux 5.5; kernel 2.6.18-274.12.1.el5xen. It connects to an APC SMART-UPS via an APC SmartCard using the snmp-ups driver. It generally works: upsmon will detect if the battery is low

On Jun 8, 2019, at 4:16 PM, Roger Price wrote: > > Is your System Shutdown Plan to shut down using upsmon or using the script upsched-cmd? In upssched.conf you do not have a line > > AT LOWBATT ups at ... EXECUTE lowbatt > > and in upssched-cmd there is nothing to shut down the system. Joe, Roger has a good point - the SHUTDOWNCMD should work as long as the master system

Hi, this does sound like a useful idea - although for the principle of least surprise and for variation in deployments, I'd rather have it as a (non-default state of a) configuration toggle that can be set via `upsmon.conf`: whether this particular client exits after processing FSD or not. The onus for the rest would be on general systems integration - e.g. ensure that init scripts `K*`ill the