On Mon, 23 Nov 2009, Adam Tkac wrote: > On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 07:19:27PM +0100, walter harms wrote: Main > reason why I used different options than reference NTP software > (www.ntp.org) is that busybox applet is based on OpenNTP > (www.openntpd.org). Denys already renamed all options as in reference > NTP.
Just thought I'd mention in passing my experience with openntp vs the reference implementation (which is, admittedly, rather large). In brief I was very unimpressed with openntp. The main issues I remembering encountering are: 1. openntp only provides sntp status monitoring, so ntpdc and ntpdq queries fail. This isn't particularly important, but is irritating, as sntp reporting is rather basic. 2. As I remember it, its error handling is really rather rubbish. I seem to remember, for example, that if the ntp server is not available at startup then it gets into a mode where it reports being synchronised despite being nothing of the sort. 3. The fact that `ntpd -s` sets the time *instantly* is a sign of lack of enthusiasm about precise timekeeping! Now, this is all vague stuff, and no doubt with a rewrite the most egregious error handling issues will have been caught, and after all if (as I do in my application) one cares about excellent timekeeping then building the reference server is easy enough. Just hoping this is helpful to somebody working with NTP. Didn't know that openntp was in busybox, maybe that's pretty recent? _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
