On 10/25/07, Boris Goldberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thank you very much for that (valuable) reply! > BTW, this is an argument for making an OpenNTPD ntpdate tool or adding > one_time_synchronization functionality into ntpd. :)
no, it's not making an argument for a one-shot sync attempt in ntpd. that's what "rdate -na" is for. ntpd is for those who care that their clock remains close to an authoritative source of time. synchronization isn't a one-time thing. it's an ongoing process. a peecee isn't a terribly controlled environment - you have electrical noise, temperature changes, processor loads, interrupts ... all of which make it very difficult to keep time on a free-running clock. CK -- GDB has a 'break' feature; why doesn't it have 'fix' too?
