On 2/5/02 at 10:56 AM, Matt Schalit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Secondly this whole discussion about setting the date > is a waste of time until David replaces the broken busybox > date with a working date binary. What good is it to set > the clock with atomic precision when date doesn't even know > the difference between GMT and EST?
I don't program busybox. I don't control busybox. I didn't write busybox or the busybox date command. The "broken date" is only in the reporting of the timezone, as I remember. If the system is set correctly, it doesn't matter. rdate, ntpdate, hwclock - they all work just fine - and two of them are in busybox. As a matter of fact - hwclock is not. > Most programs get the > date and time wrong, while the other half log with a shifted > timestamp? The syslog goes kablooie. You have no idea when > anything happened. The programs that get the time wrong are their own problems (not problems with date) - syslogd, for example, is the full version. ssmtp is ssmtp - if it gets the date wrong, it is its own fault as long as the timezones are set correctly. Make sure TZ is set and /etc/localtime points to a file that exists and is correct. In my mind, the TZ environment variable should be all that is required - but it would appear things are not that way any more. It used to be simple... someone had to muck it up. At worst - things are either in GMT or in localtime. Period. If it's really bad - forget timezones and set the system hardware time to local time, not GMT. -- David Douthitt UNIX Systems Administrator HP-UX, Unixware, Linux [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
