On Tue, Nov 15, 2005 at 09:27:33AM -0500, the unit calling itself Bakken, Luke wrote: > Shane J Pearson wrote: > > J, > > > > On 15/11/2005, at 9:42 AM, J Moore wrote: > > > >> Prior discussions notwithstanding, the fact is that the log messages > >> are misleading. I *understand* now... if the log messages were > >> written differently, I never would've had to ask. > > > > Reasonable person scenario: > > > > o Notice odd ntpd log entries. > > o #man ntpd > > o Notice SECOND paragraph says: > > > > "ntpd uses the adjtime(2) system call to correct the local system > > time without causing time jumps. Adjustments larger than 128ms > > are logged using syslog(3). The threshold value is chosen to > > avoid having local clock drift thrash the log files." > > > > o Crisis averted. > > > > Even I remember the prior thread about ntpd log messages. Jay should be > happy he has the option of changing the log message himself, even though > the ntpd manual page explains the situation clearly. The code for ntpd > is readily available.
I am very happy about that Luke - I really am. I agree with everything you've said. What's prolonged this discussion is that some people insist that the phrase in the log message can somehow be justified as being both clear and correct. It is neither, and those who maintain otherwise are either: a) ignorant of the English language, or b) like the officials sent to preview the emperor's new clothes (http://www.andersen.sdu.dk/vaerk/hersholt/TheEmperorsNewClothes_e.html) Hmmm... I wonder if a project has ever forked over the grammar in the log message? :) Jay
