Thanks Fabian: Here is my output from the recent revision:
Wed, Mar 28 2012 20:21:00.929 Wed, Mar 28 2012 20:21:01.433 Wed, Mar 28 2012 20:21:01.940 Wed, Mar 28 2012 20:21:02.450 Wed, Mar 28 2012 20:21:02.954 Wed, Mar 28 2012 20:21:03.461 Wed, Mar 28 2012 20:21:03.968 Wed, Mar 28 2012 20:21:04.475 Wed, Mar 28 2012 20:21:04.982 Wed, Mar 28 2012 20:21:05.492 Wed, Mar 28 2012 20:21:05.996 Wed, Mar 28 2012 20:21:06.503 Wed, Mar 28 2012 20:21:07.010 Wed, Mar 28 2012 20:21:07.520 Wed, Mar 28 2012 20:21:08.024 Wed, Mar 28 2012 20:21:08.533 Wed, Mar 28 2012 20:21:09.038 Wed, Mar 28 2012 20:21:09.545 On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 5:54 PM, Fabian Wenk <[email protected]> wrote: > > As you can see in your own output, you still have the problem, that > depending on the run time of the processes in the loop, you may miss a > second. This could also be the leap second. :) > > Do something like this, which has been mention already here from Daniel > Norton (on one line, the relevant part is doing the loop 240 times and only > half a second sleep): > > for i in `seq 0 240` ; do ntptime | awk '/time d3/ {print $3" "$4" "$5" > "$6" "$7}' | sed 's/,$//' ; sleep 0.5 ; done > > This will give you the following output: > Wed, Mar 28 2012 23:50:44.355 > Wed, Mar 28 2012 23:50:44.865 > Wed, Mar 28 2012 23:50:45.380 > Wed, Mar 28 2012 23:50:45.894 > Wed, Mar 28 2012 23:50:46.415 > Wed, Mar 28 2012 23:50:46.925 > Wed, Mar 28 2012 23:50:47.453 > Wed, Mar 28 2012 23:50:47.980 > Wed, Mar 28 2012 23:50:48.503 > Wed, Mar 28 2012 23:50:49.027 > Wed, Mar 28 2012 23:50:49.548 > Wed, Mar 28 2012 23:50:50.064 > Wed, Mar 28 2012 23:50:50.597 > ^C > > Most seconds will be displayed twice, but at least you won't miss any > single one at all. > > > bye > Fabian > ______________________________**_________________ > pool mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/**pool <http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/pool> >
_______________________________________________ pool mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/pool
